[r-t] Multi-cyclic composition

[Adam Brady]

On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 16:19, Jonathan Agg <jonathan.agg at gmail.com> wrote:

> Adam has also come up with more methods fitting the same framework with
> significantly more music: https://complib.org/composition/78583 (along
> with several other interesting looking recent compositions:
> https://complib.org/composition/search/?composer=Adam%20A%20Brady)
>
> Thanks for shoutout Jaggers.  I really like the idea of building more
musical variety into cyclic compositions.  This framework certainly does
make it difficult to devise attractive-looking methods, but perhaps the
variety is worth it.  I would be fascinated to see any other attempts to
build on what Jonathan has shown us can be done.

Coincidentally I have been taking a particular interest in cyclic maximus
recently too, and thought that a peal composition using all plain methods
could be an interesting experiment.  Rather than getting up to the required
19 leads per part for an 11-part composition by using calls, I looked for
other lead heads (based on plain bob lead heads but with some bells
switched around in hopefully musical ways) which I could visit in addition
to the usual 11*11 previously mentioned using palindromic methods all with
12ths-place lead ends.  I came up with a plan based on the classic 6 method
11-part, replacing the g-group method (e.g. Deimos) with 5 methods which
allow for runs to be achieved fairly easily in each lead, and which also
result in an additional cyclic shunt once you've got through those 5
methods.  So, with the "link" method as the first lead and the block of 5
methods coming up twice (ABCDE and EDCBA) in each part, you visit 3
different "cyclic parts"/courses in each part, along with some other
unusual lead heads for a bit of variety, while still having the more stable
and predictable middle of the part.  I'm sure there will be other
variations on this theme - this just happens to be the first plan I
stumbled across through trial and error.

On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 14:58, Alan Reading <alan.reading at googlemail.com>
wrote:

> Variety of run types through the part I would think would be the main
> advantage? Although perhaps also an element of Jonathan wanting to see how
> far the idea of multiple shunts could be pushed?
> It's not going to be easy to get all the methods to feel nice and be
> ringable though. I wonder if there is a compromise solution with 4 or 5
> shunts per part and a few regular methods for breathing space?
>

This plan could be somewhere close to the compromise you're talking about,
Alan, between classic cyclic and maximally-multi-cyclic.

5016 10-Spliced Bob Maximus
https://complib.org/composition/78180

10032 10-Spliced Treble Dodging Maximus (on the same plan as the
all-plain-methods peal)
https://complib.org/composition/78297

Thanks.
-- 
Adam

(My email address is www.adambrady at gmail.com not adambrady at gmail.com)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://bellringers.org/pipermail/ringing-theory/attachments/20210331/41cfc6ae/attachment-0001.html>