[r-t] Extension

King, Peter R peter.king at imperial.ac.uk
Fri Jul 25 09:49:25 UTC 2008

PS: Peter King says, inter alia, "So Grandsire is completely different in 
all these respects from plain bob, for which, allegedly, it is the odd bell 
extension." Would you accept S. Oxford Bob triples as the extension of the 

No I would make the same comment that the methods "feel" different. The way they are rung is also different. The calls are variable hunt (I know that the call is not part of the method but the point I am trying to make is that unless you only ring plain courses issues about how you conduct and compose for a method seem to be important). This is more relevant for Grandisre/Plain Bo because these tend to be the first methods that learners come across. I don't think many learners see Grandsire as Plain Bob with an extra hunt (or indeed plain bob as grandsire without the extra hunt). Admittedly as you get more experience these differences have less impact but I do think that most people would agree that plain bob minor and triples feel much more akin (in terms of coursing order transpositions, compositions and just the feel of it) than plain bob minor and grandsire triples. 
I suppose it could also be said that Cambridge Maximus and minor feel very different (the mixing of the coursing order below the treble is much more obvious on the higher numbers) so perhaps PJE is right that method extension is guaranteed to introduce new elements that alter the feel of the method and so attempts to regularise it are always going to be fraught with difficulties.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory/attachments/20080725/d2adbddc/attachment-0004.html>

More information about the ringing-theory mailing list