[r-t] Lead head codes redux

Robin Woolley robin at robinw.org.uk
Fri Jun 23 16:02:25 UTC 2017

I have two ideas in response to Don's comment.

Firstly - by definition. It would be possible to define the appropriate 
lead-code. e.g., "on 2n+1 bells, the lead code for the nth lead shall be 
defined as p(n-1)  (or r(n-1) as required)." We are thinking about this 
w.r.t Extension where there are several differently notated extensions 
resulting in the same method. For example, Cambridge S8 could be notated 
as a 1DE or 1EF or 1FG or 3FG extension of the minor - but the result is 
the same. Never underestimate the power of a definition!

Secondly - a complete re-arrangement with lead-codes going like this 
(2nds place): p, p1, p2,.., p(n-2), q, r(n-2),.., r2, r1, r and 
similarly using s,t,u  for plain-hunt @ lead methods. This would cause 
endless fun for years!


More information about the ringing-theory mailing list