[r-t] Peal Prover
teds.bells at tesco.net
Thu Sep 4 15:41:27 UTC 2014
On 04/09/2014 13:47, Don Morrison wrote:
> I'm trying to help someone with a composition of an alliance major
> method. He is using a bit of software called Peal Prover with which I
> have no experience. ....
> Imagine entering the place notation for a method like Aston Martin
> Alliance. It seems to be neglecting the 78 half-lead, and constructing
> some sort of 32 change lead method .....
> Does anyeone with experience with this software have any thoughts on
> what may be going wrong? Does it perhaps have some preconceived notion
> of what the lead length of a method is that needs to be updated for
> an alliance method with an unusual one? Does it have a convention
> different than '.' for separating two consecutive changes in place
> notation? Anything else folks can think of?
I have just entered Aston Martin Alliance and it works fine.
Place notation is entered as a column, x 38 x 14 etc. being separated
only by virtue of being on subsequent lines in the column, i.e by
pressing enter. Notation is entered up to and including the half lead
place. The programme must be set to "standard" in the method type but
will work as "principle" if the full lead is entered rather than the
half lead; this can be useful for asymmetric methods.The whole notation
has to be used, the short form x3x8 etc doesn't work. The lead end place
is entered separately and the pn for calls must also be entered before
the method will be processed. You must enter the number of changes in
the lead, 34 in this case. I am not a composer but I recall PJE once
speaking well of peal-prover as a basic proving programme. It is
somewhat non-intuitive but it seems reliable.
More information about the ringing-theory