[r-t] Spliced Cinques & Max

[Don Morrison]

On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 12:13 PM, Stephen Penney <stephen at ucalegon.com> wrote:
> So the example Richard gave of a peal of minor stating and ending with the
> same method would not be called "spliced", as it contains round blocks
> which aren't.

I don't think that's correct. In general, there is no way to partition
the overall
performance into multiple, distinct round blocks, from the beginning, such that
for each such block all possible rows appear the same number of times.
The only such round block is the overall 5040. If you count the
"interior" blocks as you are doing, you have to split one of the
blocks to be a bit at the front and a bit at the end.



-- 
Don Morrison <dfm at ringing.org>
"For me there's nothing offbeat. What passes for normal is very
strange to me."
   -- Peter Sellars, program notes for _The Children of Herakles_