[r-t] FCHs

[John Thurman]

MBD:-

> I just find it hard to imagine a person clever enough to work out that a
> symmetrical plain method doesn't have internal falseness, but stupid enough
> to think the same argument works for TD. Especially when these people are
> capable of composing true peals of Grandsire and Stedman Triples.
>
This all started with an innocent enquiry from someone new to the list
looking for a bit of help and explanation. MBD seems to be using it as
an opportunity to remind us all how clever he is, and in the process
is managing to come across as rude and obnoxious. Unless I'm missing
some massive in-joke, which is entirely possible. Not very nice when
someone just wants a bit of help is it?

Producing a decent composition is a unique blend of art and science
however that composition is arrived at. I don't claim to fully
understand the theory relating to falseness, but I have produced a few
basic comps that I think are pretty good by a combination of trial and
error, and with what little knowledge I have. Are they (my comps) any
less worth ringing just because the composer is a bit thick and didn't
go to a proper university?

I think it is important that potential composers are not discouraged-
I think the attitude of one or two contributors to this list isn't
really doing anything to further that aim. I lurk to try to learn
something and better myself- and occasionally manage to work something
out myself as a result. MBD (and i have met him in real life and know
he isn't really like that!) telling everyone how obvious everything is
is not all that helpful. Or maybe this list is just here for
point-scoring and a few well-educated people's verbal jousting?

Have a nice weekend all

JT