[r-t] 23-spliced TB major

[Mark Davies]

Don writes,

> Not much of a fan of typical caters and cinques compositions, then, I
> presume?

Ah, you misunderstand. They are also a round blocks, as I tried to 
explain in my previous email, at the level of the change. Touches coming 
round at the snap are the same: they form a continuous loop of changes. 
All touches start and finish in rounds and so form the perfect loop of 
round-blockness, with the beautiful property that the number of rows 
equals the number of changes.

However, we don't generally consider the structure of the composition, 
at the level of the lead, to be a round block in these cases. (We could, 
if you took the partial leads to be composition building blocks in their 
own right). But compositions consisting of whole leads, such as Philip's 
LLC, do of course form round blocks at the level of the lead.

Consider the 3-part touch LLC-. How many changes of method are there? Do 
you think there are 5? Now consider how many changes of method there are 
per part. Would you say there are two changes of method for the first 
two parts, and only one for the third? Or just one change of method in 
each part? Doesn't add up, does it. But if you view the touch as a round 
block with 6 change of method, then suddenly it all makes sense.

> LC.L LC(s).(C)

This has 3 com. It is not a structural round block in the conventional 
sense, because of the partial lead.

You could of course consider the two leads of (C) to be a complete lead 
of another method with place notation x38, in which case you have a 
structural round block again, and now 5 com:

   LC-LLCsX

But this is a different composition.

MBD