[r-t] Definition of a call
rlee5040 at yahoo.com
Thu Jun 9 10:28:52 UTC 2011
On Thu, 9 Jun 2011 08:48:06, Philip Barnes wrote
>The key issue is that it seeks to find a way to accurately describe what the
>band were ringing - in the sense of what was in their mind and how they went
>>about ringing it, rather than a mathematical definition of what was rung.
>There are various "titles" for this variation of ringing. When we did this in
>Birmingham >about 20 years ago it acquired the title "New Start". We also
>played about with it with the OUS in the 1980's and I remember calling it
>"Kingham style" >because we first did it after meeting short for a peal there.
>All the conductor does is say "Go again" but in the middle of the course,
>rather than at the lead >end. We rang a quarter of Bristol Maximus on the plan
>around 1992 - and certainly didn't do so by starting with Original Maximus and
>having a lot of different >calls.
>It can be fun, it's challenging ring, challenging to compose (although it
>raises the possibility of peals in a single method without bobs or singles (my
>>disappointment is that the Methods Committee defined it as a "call" when it's
>really just starting again) and may even allow composers to cram more and
>>exciting music than is conventionally possible into peals of recognisable
>methods that mortals can ring.
>There's more to change ringing than rules and maths! Try it and enjoy.
On the subject of New Start, how about the following as the basis for a peal:
3136 Bristol Surprise Maximus
1234567890ET 3.5 leads
243658709TE1 7.5 leads
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ringing-theory