mark at snowtiger.net
Thu Aug 23 22:31:44 UTC 2012
Interestingly, if you want a method where one or more bells have
reflective symmetry about a row (hence do not have "well-formed" paths
according to the CC Decisions), and you also want the other bells to
reflect around a change, then you normally end up with a symmetric
method as a whole (by which I mean the place notation reflects). It's
more difficult producing the same result in an asymmetric method.
Now, I shall term these methods, in which one or more bells have
reflective symmetry about a row, "point methods". This is because the
point of symmetry is always at a point in the blueline. "Point bells"
are always hunt bells, because the pivot sends them back to where they
started in the lead.
By the CC definitions, such methods are termed "Hybrid", which is the
category used where the hunt bells follow asymmetric paths, and is the
catch-all lowest common denominator for hunt-dominated methods. But as
we've seen, you can produce point methods with working bells, and where
all the working bells have normal reflective symmetry. This seems a nice
and natural thing to do. The point bells are hunt bells, and the normal
bells working bells.
But from my first paragraph, if you do so, generally you get a symmetric
method overall. Labelling such methods "Hybrid", and dumping them
amongst the completely asymmetric set, seems peculiar to me.
More information about the ringing-theory