[r-t] FCHs

Simon Humphrey sh53246 at gmail.com
Fri Apr 24 07:46:53 UTC 2015

Andrew Rawlinson:

>Robin Woolley wrote:
>"The best I have found was by John Segar. It does not deal with
>split-tenors - but allows FCHs to be extracted with facility."
>Segar's method can actually be used to extract split tenors falseness, as far as I know, providing
>you have the time!
>The only difference is that you look for two bells within the two proving rows that have the same
>amount of bells between them, eg. 7xx8xxx and xx7xx8x and then apply the same rules otherwise. In
>terms of the incidence, you take the leads from the top of the columns that the bell on furthest
>right in the proving row (making sure you're looking at them in the same way, for cyclical
>reasons!) and that is the lead that the falseness will be found in. 

The attached document might (just possibly) be of interest here.  It describes a process for extracting the complete falseness at the lead level for a treble dodging major method, which with practice can be carried out with pencil and paper in about 10 minutes.
The process expresses falseness in terms of false coursing orders rather than course heads, because that is what I prefer to work with when composing.  Do any other composers on the list use FCOs instead of FCHs?

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: extracting falseness v4.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 379392 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory/attachments/20150424/035c0e42/attachment-0001.doc>

More information about the ringing-theory mailing list