[r-t] What people think they have rung

[John Harrison]

> > that two methods that could not be distinguished by the rows in any of
> > their plain courses ...

> But methods are not defined by their rows, but by a sequence of changes.
> Beverley and Surfleet S Minor cannot be distinguished by their rows.

The changes are indeed the essence of a method, but you can't hear a change
- all you can hear is a sequence of rows from which you can deduce the
changes.  

I interpted Matthew's comment to mean 'distinguished by the sequence of
rows in any plain course' (so Beverley `& Surfleet are different).  I don't
think he meant 'the rows as an unordered collection'.

-- 
John Harrison
Website http://jaharrison.me.uk