[r-t] Wormald's Cut Delight Major

[Philip Earis]

Alan:
"I wonder whether or not such devices are worthwhile to obtain that amount of music? I can certainly think of one or two people who would not be very impressed if I suggested ringing such a method!"

I hear what you are saying, but feel the problem lies with these people's attitudes rather than the new method.

Any notation is fine if it is well-justified.  I know this is a circular argument, but you get the gist.  

I would say these places are definitely well-justified here.  Other examples of long notations which accomplish great things would be the 123678 in Anglia Cyclic, and indeed the same change in the double method Skywalker.

Actually, I think much longer notations could be used to great effects in eg maximus.  I'm currently working on a composition that uses variations on the "runs" theme - incorporating in a neat, cohesive whole sections of the Pipe Amalthea 12-part, of winked up minor, and of regular stuff, all to produce conceptually the same type of music, but with very different examples and in very different ways.  I would be really keen to add some plain-change style slow ripple effect to the mix also, but fear that would be a step too far for the more dinosaur-inclined element...

That notwithstanding, the rather forced disdain some people have for certain ringing features they are unfamiliar with, be it contiguous places, or 87s at back, or more than two consecutive blows, or compositions which aren't 3-parts with high CRU counts, or irregular leadheads, or whatever, just creates stifled thinking and artificial barriers to better things.

Here endeth the focus.


DISCLAIMER:

This communication (including any attachments) is intended for the use of the addressee only and may contain confidential, privileged or copyright material. It may not be relied upon or disclosed to any other person without the consent of the RSC. If you have received it in error, please contact us immediately. Any advice given by the RSC has been carefully formulated but is necessarily based on the information available, and the RSC cannot be held responsible for accuracy or completeness. In this respect, the RSC owes no duty of care and shall not be liable for any resulting damage or loss. The RSC acknowledges that a disclaimer cannot restrict liability at law for personal injury or death arising through a finding of negligence. The RSC does not warrant that its emails or attachments are Virus-free: Please rely on your own screening.