[r-t] Opinions sought

Ted Steele bells at tedsteele.plus.com
Sat Jan 26 10:59:12 GMT 2019

On 26/01/2019 02:53, Alexander E Holroyd wrote:
> In my view this whole discussion typifies the way the framing and 
> approach is all wrong.  (I appear to be in a minority here among those 
> who tend to discuss these things, although not necessarily among the 
> wider ringing world).
> There is no need for a formal definition of "spliced", any more than 
> there is for terms like "tail end" and "tower outing".

How very sensible!

> Spliced refers to a piece of change ringing composed of more than one 
> method.  That is all anyone should ever need.

I absolutely agree. The indication of compositions used in peals should 
suffice to give further information that could be required. Although 
having said that, much clearer indication of what was rung needs to be 
given if there is to ever be a situation where all performances are open 
to scrutiny.

Another thought, (I doubt that it hasn't been covered in discussions 
elsewhere). Why should we be hung up on whether the change of method 
occurs at rounds or not? We certainly do not require changes to occur at 
any other fixed point.

Consider a multi method block of minor that is longer than 720 changes 
and so must contain rounds. Suppose that at some point the method 
changes from Cambridge Surprise to Hull or Ipswich or any other of that 
group. Could anyone examining only the half dozen rows either side of 
the lead end (and with no other information) say whether or not there 
had been a  change of method and if so, where it had taken effect? If 
rounds had occurred at the lead end would it be sufficient for the 
composer/conductor to insist that in fact the method change had taken 
place at the trebles snap? I think the entire exercise is a classic 
example of over analysis to the point of becoming self-defeating. Images 
of heads disappearing up dark passages come to mind.

We are sometimes told that it is not the rows actually rung that defines 
the "method" but how it was described and rung by the ringers involved 
that is significant. Thus an asymmetrical single method might be rung as 
half-lead spliced. If I am told that I am going to ring spliced doubles 
then it will matter not at all to me whether the method changes come at 
rounds or anywhere else, the mental process will be the same.


Ted (A citizen of the wider ringing world)

More information about the ringing-theory mailing list