[r-t] FW: Spliced Surprise Major problem

[Don Morrison]

Oops, you're right. I got my in and out of courses confused. Duh!
Teach me to reply to email this early in the morning (it is still
morning here). Sorry. I'll go crawl under my rock again....

On 1/9/07, John Goldthorpe <johng at omnieng.co.uk> wrote:
> Don Morrison wrote:
> > On 1/9/07, John Goldthorpe <johng at omnieng.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> Yes.  Of course, it is possible to join any methods that don't start
> >> with X with an X call.  I did wonder about this yesterday as most of the
> >> Chandler methods don't start with X.  I'm giving it a try at the moment
> >> using X singles only and no bobs.  The results so far show that there
> >> are definitely less possibilities than with the 3456 single only.
> >>
> >
> > And, of course, such a composition will also have to have an even
> > number of changes of hunt bell (and thus more than one) in each part
> > (if it's major, with an even number of parts, etc).
> >
> >
> Perhaps I am missing your point Don, but I don't see why there has to be
> an even number of changes of hunt bell in each part.  In fact, if no
> other types of single are being used, then an 8 part composition must
> have an odd number of singles in each part to ensure that one of the
> out-of-course part ends is produced at the end of the first part.  ie
> 23456781, 45678123, 67812345 or 81234567 for a cyclic 8 part.
>
> John
>
> _______________________________________________
> ringing-theory mailing list
> ringing-theory at bellringers.net
> http://bellringers.net/mailman/listinfo/ringing-theory_bellringers.net
>


-- 
Don Morrison <dfm at ringing.org>, <dfm2 at cmu.edu>
"Practice doesn't make perfect, nor is it supposed to.  Practice is
about increasing your repertoire of ways to recover from your
mistakes."                                          -- Joann C Gutin