[r-t] FCHs

Simon Humphrey sh at keystrata.co.uk
Thu May 20 09:27:01 UTC 2010

> To be honest, if you are surprised that one lead of a TD method is false
> against several others, or can't work out for yourself which ones it's
> false against, you haven't got much hope, have you? Questions about why
> false course heads fall into groups are the sort of thing I'd expect
> from a budding composer, not why falseness happens in the first place.

All 18th century composers must have been pretty hopeless, then, Mark!

It was a big shock to the Exercise in 1768, fifty years after the first peal
of Oxford Treble Bob Major, when Christopher Wells discovered compositions
of the method could be false even if all lead ends were different. And even
then, IIRC, he only considered the 1-2 section - realisation that the other
sections also give rise to falseness didn't come till later.  Obvious to us
now, of course.

Has the derivation of incidence of falseness been mentioned yet on this
thread? i.e. how to work out which specific leads of the course headed by an
FCH are false against the plain course?  There is an astonishing and
beautiful relationship between the incidence and the FCH groups themselves,
first discovered (as far as I know) by Ted Shuttleworth in the 1960's, which
I've never seen published.


More information about the ringing-theory mailing list