Changeringing Wiki - User contributions [en-gb]

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 9 - Maximus

2011-05-23T13:35:31Z

Pje24:

__NOTOC__
===A Review by Philip Earis - continued===
12-bell ringing has enjoyed a strong decade. Single-method ringing has continued its advance towards better methods and better compositions, but the developments – although significant – have often felt more like evolution than revolution. With spliced maximus, though, a real step change for the better has taken place.

===Bristol cream===
Turning first to single methods, the decade has seen a pleasant trend to more coursing-dominated (ie more musical) methods. Towerbell peals of Bristol over the decade are up 14% to 572, with Bristol becoming the most rung single maximus method for the first time. This is a very welcome development, and a tangible sign of ringing progress. Conductors have responded accordingly, with a plethora of delightful Bristol compositions, almost universally incorporating considerable little-bell music.

In a demonstration that continual evolution leads to revolution, anecdotally it seems that very few poor Bristol Maximus compositions are rung. I don’t have statistics, but would strongly suspect that at least 90% of rung Bristol Maximus compositions date from the 1990s and present decade.

Towerbell peals of Yorkshire are up 11% to 471, whilst Cambridge is down 5% to 520. If these trends continue, Yorkshire will overtake Cambridge in the coming decade.

===Out with the old, in with the new…===
At the dodgy-method part of the spectrum (and sadly it’s a big part), it is of some comfort to see peal numbers in some “nasties” decline. The usual pantomime villain duo of Lyddington and Belvoir have happily dropped off a cliff, with two and one peals rung dis-respectively. The trio of mediocre London-over methods Newgate, Barford and Londinium have seen a collective 56% drop to 34, whilst peals of Pudsey have had a similar decline.

There have been a significant number of new methods rung for the first time, many of them rather nice. Interestingly, the good methods have sometimes resulted from new spliced compositions.

===Spliced surprises===
Indeed, it’s with spliced peals that the statistics become perhaps most striking. Now the total number of towerbell peals of spliced maximus over the decade seems pretty constant at around 340. However, what has been rung in peals of spliced has changed dramatically.

In the 1990s, 88% of towerbell peals of spliced maximus were in just spliced treble-dodging methods (and most of these just spliced surprise). However, in the 2000s that proportion falls considerably, to around 61%. The number of peals of “mixed” spliced rung (incorporating different treble paths, and so on) is up 187%, and provides some evidence that composers are using the best methods for the job much more frequently, rather than sticking to tired conventions.

Big advances in spliced composition – led by David Pipe – have driven this transition. A simultaneous boost has been given by the early adoption and active commissioning of new ideas by Tony Kench and his peal band. Cyclic compositions, including 12-parts, have become widespread. New musical concepts, including the mega-tittums coursing effect, have also been developed.

===Some much done, how much left to do?===
Composing spliced maximus involves a vast search space, meaning predominantly manual input and logic is required for the best results. Computers have played a large part in the much more constrained search spaces of tenors-together single method peals, though, again with SMC32 leading the way.

Indeed, the nine and a bit courses of tenors-together maximus is sufficiently small that David Hull published complete composition collections for methods like Cambridge over the decade. If people want to do new things here, they’ll have to broaden their horizons.

It will certainly be very interesting to see how maximus ringing develops. Perhaps discrete blocks of changes, each giving a different musical effect, might be the way forward. We shall see…

==1) Classic cyclic 11- and 12-parts using a link method approach – David Pipe – (November 1999 / September 2000 / August 2001)==
I’ve selected the “Pipe Classic” 11-part here in view of its considerable influence on the decade’s ringing and subsequent compositions. Whilst admittedly it was first rung on handbells just before the decade’s start, the first tower-bell performance was in August 2001.

As with David’s (later) analogous royal peals, the basic idea is a cyclic 11-part construction to deliver both continuous run music and the all-the-work property. The composition has no calls – the link method Slinky is used to move the bells between cyclic parts.

The main block of the composition has the 2nd and the tenor of that cyclic part (so bells 5 and 6 in the first part) alternately ringing “pivot leads”, ie the leads where they are the pivot bell. The consequent palindromic structure is both very elegant, includes all available leads in the part, and provides a super balance of forward and reverse runs in each part.

The methods used are very well-chosen: a mix between the established Ariel, Zanussi and Maypole (concentrated Bristol), and the newly-designed Phobos and Deimos, both of which deliver blockbuster leads in the composition.

Phobos is a tidy l-group method with two fishtails either side of the leadend, and plain hunt on the front six around the half-lead. The music flows well, and includes complete wraps of reverse rounds.

Deimos is the real music-box regular method of the decade in its application here. It is one of a very small number of good methods on more than six bells that has 3rds made at the half-lead (normally the kiss of death). However, by skilful use of successive plain hunting on three at different places in the row, and adding dodges whenever there are runs, marvellous wall-to-wall music is delivered throughout the chosen leads.

5016 Spliced Maximus (6m)
234567890ET Slinky Little Treble Place
4523ET90786 Deimos Alliance
534T20E8967 Phobos Surprise
24E5937T608 Maypole Alliance
3T504826E79 Ariel Surprise
E29475638T0 Zanussi Surprise
T038564729E Zanussi Surprise
9E72648503T Ariel Surprise
08T637594E2 Maypole Alliance
796E8204T53 Phobos Surprise
8607T93E524 Deimos Alliance
67890ET2345
11-part

The decade saw many variations on this plan, which are nicely chronicled on Roddy Horton’s website: [http://rrhorton.net/arkcyclic.html]

The Pipe Classic composition has methods with odd-numbered pivot bells (3 in Deimos, 5 in Maypole, 7 in Zanussi, 9 in Ariel, 11 in Phobos). As an example of a later variation, John Warboys produced a composition in “red” methods on a very similar plan, but where the methods had even-numbered pivot bells instead.

Of course, with a cyclic construction there’s a strong case to be made for all 12 bells to be involved in the runs, rather than a fixed treble creating an artificial musical “block” that disrupts the runs.

As such, David soon developed a 12-part composition on a similar plan. Being a regular double method, the plain lead of Bristol / Maypole in the 11-part structure contains the row eg 234567890ET1 when the 2nd of the part is pivoting. As all other cyclic rotations of this row occur in different parts, and rounds itself is a cyclic rotation of this row, Bristol needs to be replaced with a different method to preserve truth. Here Glazgow Little Surprise is used:

5040 Spliced Maximus (6m)
1234567890ET
Lynx Diff 64523T10E897
Deimos A 653412ET9078
Phobos S 624T503817E9
Glazgow LS 6315E4927T80
Ariel S 6T204857391E
Zanussi S 61E39574820T
Zanussi S 60T827495E31
Ariel S 6E91738504T2
Glazgow LS 6807T92E4153
Phobos S 697E8103T524
Deimos A 67890ET12345
12-part. 1152 Ariel, Phobos, Zanussi S; 864 Deimos A; 576 Glazgow LS; 144 Lynx Differential. 119 com, atw for all 12 bells.

==2) The Rise of Mega-tittums – Philip Earis, David Pipe, Philip Saddleton, Rob Lee et al – February 2006==
The possibilities given by all consecutive bells coursing have already been mentioned in the royal article. Suffice to say, the effect becomes better and more pronounced the more bells there are.

I think I first wrote about the possibilities in this February 2006 message to this list: [http://www.bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2006-February/001292.html]

There was quick collaborative progress at developing the concept, developing ways of getting from rounds into all consecutive bells coursing as quickly and elegantly as possible.

David Pipe soon realised that a sequence of different bobs in the same position could be used for this. A 10ths place bob 'out' turns the coursing order from the plain course 324 to the tittums style 432. This effect is repeated with appropriate bobs every course until mega-tittums is obtained. The effect is then reversed with the inverse bobs in the second half:

3984 Bristol Maximus
O I 234567890ET
10 342567890ET
18 453627890ET
16 564738290ET
14 675849302ET
14 2345T6E7089
16 234567T8E90
18 23456789T0E
10 234567890ET
The figures refer to the type of bob. O is an 'out' for the tenor, I is an 'in' for the 2nd. Ideal for handbells - all pairs are either in their home position or coursing.

Philip Saddleton claimed independent discovery of this, but expanded the concept to a peal length by combining this structure with a cyclic 11-part plan. This can be very easily achieved by having a single lead of the method in the mega-tittums coursing order before reversing the transpositions:

33440 Maypole Alliance (or 6072 Crayford Little Bob)
0 1ET907856423
8 1ET907862534
6 1ET908273645
4 1ET029384756
4 1890E7T62534
6 1890ET273645
8 1890ET234756
0 1890ET234567
11-part

Rob Lee recognised that mx methods could be useful in the transition between tittums / cyclic courses, and put together a prototype composition:

5104 Spliced Maximus (4m)
234567890ET Br
795E3T20486 Br
T0E89674523 Av
14 ET089674523 Or
16 0E9T8674523 Av
18 908E7T64523 Or
10 89706E5T423 Br
10 ET029384567 Av
18 0E9T8234567 Li
16 908ET234567 Or
14 890ET234567
11 part.
584 Avon D., Bristol S., Orion S., 352 Littleport Little S., 98 com, atw

I further incorporated similar ideas in spliced maximus compositions using Pipe 11-part plans, but the real crowning glory of such a fusion would take a number of month’s further development…

==3) “Jupiter” cyclic spliced 12-part on a mega-tittums plan – David Pipe – November 2007==
The aim of this composition was to combine the cyclic runs character of the Classic 11- and 12-parts with some mega-tittums music where all consecutive bells are coursing. A 12-part structure is good because it naturally supports both the cyclic runs and the mega-tittums music.

The first half of each part is aimed at generating runs, whilst the second part efficiently gets to the mega-tittums coursing order, has a principle to exploit this and simultaneously switch to another part, and then reverses the bobs to get back to the part end.

The beauty of this composition is that both these halves have wonderful custom-designed features – features which may not be immediately apparent.

1234567890ET
Io LA 142638507T9E
Chaldene LA 13527496E8T0
Leda LA 1648203T5E79
Callisto LA 157392E4T608
Europa LTP 18604T2E3957
Europa LTP 1795E3T20486
Callisto LA 108T6E492735
Leda LA 19E7T5038264
Chaldene LA 1T0E89674523
Io LA 10 bob 1ET907856423
Plain B 18 bob 1ET907862534
Plain B 16 bob 1ET908273645
Amalthea LA 14 bob 1ET029384756
Amalthea LA 1T2E30495867
Ganymede Diff 12 bob 8907E6T54123
Amalthea LA 14 bob 890ET7162534
Amalthea LA 16 bob 890ET1273645
Plain B 18 bob 890ET1234756
Plain B 10 bob 890ET1234567
12-part

As far as I know, in all previous 12-part maximus compositions the methods used were pretty conventional, ie they weren’t designed for the treble to be involved in the runs as much as possible. The result can be more artificial musical “disruptive breaks” where the treble of the part breaks up runs of other bells.

Here, however, the methods in the “runny” first half were tailor-made (with a consequent variety of treble paths) to bring out maximal music in all 12 parts, involving the treble in the runs.

In the mega-tittums second half, an intrinsic problem of the 12-part structure is that the mega-tittums coursing order is the same in each of the parts, leading to potential falseness problems.

David got round this problem by choosing methods which perhaps counter-intuitively give some runs-style music in the mega-tittums coursing order. The principle chosen here is Ganymede, which has elegant mirror symmetry as well as conventional palindromic symmetry.

The real crowning glory, though, is the use of Amalthea. Whilst this is a conventional a-group method, it is not really designed to be rung in its plain course; rather, it elegantly gives some really super runs music in the mega-tittums coursing order. The music is generates is wonderfully plentiful, but also incredibly unexpected. Runs of different types, both forward and backwards, frequently just pop out of the ether. The total effect is magical.

The composition is described more fully (including figures for the leads of Amalthea) in this November 2007 message [http://www.bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2007-November/001840.html]

==4) Single Surprise Maximus (b group)==
*5042 Cambridge - David Hull
*5040 Yorkshire - Mark Davies

The decade saw further incremental progress with single-method peals, continuing the leap in attitudes started in the 1990s, and mirroring the developments in Royal compositions that have already been discussed.

Little bells runs continued to be at the fore, and happily misguided ideas such as that all compositions need to contain three whole courses of 65s seem to have been pretty well banished. Calls at 9ths are no longer a novelty, and calls in other places are becoming more commonplace.

Big bobs are around, and look to be here to stay. This is especially relevant for tenors-together b-group methods like Cambridge and Yorkshire, where the conventional length of 5042 almost invariably sees the peal have a big “duffer” section at the end.

The two b-group compositions I’ve selected are both on slightly shaky date ground for inclusion, as they were both in fact first rung in the second half of 1999 (though to other methods, I believe)

David Hull’s Cambridge has a lovely 2-part format, great use of the calls at 9ths (and potentially 8ths), and also well illustrates the musical sacrifices that must be made at the end of a composition to produce a 5042 on the usual plan:

5042 Cambridge Surprise Maximus (#4)
Composed by: David G Hull
2345678 9 M W 8 H
54362 S S S
24365 SS S SS
63452 S S SS S
34256 SS S 2
52436 S S
(32456) S
Omit 1 SS.

Mark Davies’ composition, which he calls "The Cosmic Joker", has the very attractive property that every full course contains both little-bell music and 56/65 rollups:

5088 Yorkshire Surprise Maximus
Mark B Davies
23456 B M W H
45236 - -
54362 x s
23465 s s
43652 s 2 -
43526 x -
64523 x - -
35426 - ss -
23456 -
x = 18
Includes 83 LB5, 165 LB4, 14 567890ET and 10 657890ET

==5) Single Surprise Maximus – Bristol==
*5090 #4 – David Hull, October 2003
*5088 – James Holdsworth, September 2008
*5040 #3 – Mark Davies, January 2005

Bristol is a glorious method at all stages. Unlike something like Yorkshire, though, Bristol’s different leadhead groups at different stages mean than very different strategies need to be used on different numbers of bells to get the most of the method.

Happily Bristol Maximus doesn’t have the same intrinsic problem as b-group methods, in that a nice and musical snap finish can be achieved without much difficulty. There are literally hundreds of good tenors-together compositions to choose from here, by many composers – a nice illustrative example would be David Hull’s 5090 #4:

5090 Bristol Maximus (#4)
23456 M W H
64352 - -
45362 2
32564 - S
64523 S -
43526 - 2
(42536) SB

That said, the method is very flexible. A snap finish isn’t needed or necessarily desirable, and indeed great compositions can even exist in 2-part format.

I was very attracted to the neat simple 2-part James Holdsworth composition that employs whole courses to great effect. However, the accolades have to be reduced somewhat when you realise that DJP produced something very similar in the previous decade. Why neither of these appears in the RW diary would be a mystery if the diary’s selection criteria involved compositions having notable merit.

5088 Bristol Surprise Maximus
J W Holdsworth
23456 M 9 W H
----------------------
64352 - -
56342 -
54362 -s
24365 s
----------------------
Repeat

5088 Bristol Surprise Maximus
DJP
23456 M W H
---------------
64352 1 1
56342 1
24365 s 2*
---------------
2 part. 2*=sb.

For a further example of a composition full of little-bell music, with snappy transitions between sections and limited exposure to duffer courses, the Mark Davies composition below also shows the high bar that tenors together compositions have met:

5040 Bristol Surprise Maximus (#3)
23456 M H W
(53426) s
54326 s
56423 2 -
24365 - -
(36452) - - 2
64352 2
23456 s s
Contains 8 567890ET, 102 LB5, 213 LB4

==6) Tenors-together spliced Treble Dodging Maximus (RABS)==
*Alex Byrne – January 2008
*John Warboys – September 2009

Despite the cyclic developments of the decade, tenors-together spliced in “legacy” methods continues to be rung and developed. There have recently been two simple and very elegant compositions in the four “RABS” methods, Rigel, Avon, Bristol and Strathclyde.

Both are all-the-work, and manage to achieve this using musical courses (sometimes whole courses) throughout the compositions.

Alex Byrne’s composition is a lovely palindrome, whilst John Warboys’ uses a two-part structure. Both are well worth closer inspection.

5184 Spliced TD Maximus (4 methods)
Alex Byrne
M W H
- RRRRRR.
- AAAAAAAAAAA.BBBBBBB
2 - BBB.SAARAAS.SSSSSSSSSSS.
- - - R.RRRRR.R.
2 RBBBB.BBBBR.
- - - R.RRRRR.R.
2 SSSSSSSSSSS.SAARAAS.BBBBBBB
- - BBB.AAAAAAAAAAA.

5088 Spliced TD Maximus (4 methods)
John Warboys
23456 M W H
43526 2 1 AAAAAAAAAAA-SAB-BRS-
25634 1 1 R-BBASSARSS-A
46532 1 1 SRB-RRRRRRRRRRR-
24365 2 1 2 BRRA-A-RB-SRB-A-
34625 2 1 BBBBBBBBBBB-SAB-BRS-
26543 1 1 R-BBASSARSS-A
35642 1 1 SRB-SSSSSSSSSSS-
23456 2 1 2 BRRA-A-RB-SRB-A-
1296 B,R,S; 1200 A. 53 com; atw.
The full courses of R and S can be swapped if desired.

==7) “Winking up” – Ander Holroyd / Adam Shepherd – August 2000==

“Winking up” is a great concept that was briefly visited at the beginning of the decade. There hasn’t been much investigation since, but I’m convinced there could be tantalising possibilities here.

In short, “winking up” is a way of extending a method on n bells to a method on 2n bells. So for example what bell number 3 does in a minor method defines what bells 5 and 6 do in the related winked up maximus method.

This doubling lends itself to winked up methods being rung on handbells, but there’s no reason why this has to be the case.

The classic winking “algorithm” is that:

*If on the lower stage a bell makes a place, then on the winked up higher stage, the corresponding pair of bells will do a double dodge together.
*If on the lower stage a bell hunts, then on the winked up higher stage the corresponding pair of bells will ring four changes of plain hunt on four.

The practical consequence is that to wink up from minor to maximus, the following place notations map:

Minor Winked Up Maximus
- -4589-4589
14 -369-369
36 -470-470
12 -589-589
etc

This notation may not look the most elegant, but the effect can be really excellent. Pairs of bells stay together, hunting around the change like a double act.

There has been one winked up peal rung, Wee Willie Winkie Hybrid Maximus – a winked up London Minor – was rung in 2000, and this contained 1680 runs of 4 or more consecutive bells:

5184 Wee Willie Winkie Hybrid Maximus
Arranged Adam P. Shepherd
34567890ET
----------
- 09TE784365 2
- 567890ET43 1
- 34906587ET 1
- 349078TE65 4
p 87345609TE 1
----------
6 part
Bob = 369-369 for final 589-589

Wee Willie Winkie Hybrid Maximus:
-470-470-4589-4589-470-470-369-369-4589-4589-234589-589-4589-4589-45670-470-36789-369-4589-4589-369-369
-470-470-36789-369-4589-4589-369-369-470-470-4589-4589-589-589-4589-4589-369-369-470-470-4589-4589
-470-470-589-589 (lh 128734TE6590)

Further applications can be found, I am sure. At the least, such ringing would make an interesting and very different-sounding block inserted into in a more conventional peal composition. The possibilities could be considerable – winking up cyclic methods, or tittums coursing orders, maybe. Or perhaps winky effects could be used with non-adjacent bells.

Of course, it’s not just six bell methods that can be winked up. I have vague recollections of ringing winked up Banana Doubles to create a fruity 10 bell method, as well as the memorable experience of winking up twice plain hunt on three, so it turned into a 12-bell method (the double winking was conceptually a bit tricky, at least at first, except for PABS).

There’s mileage in Shipping Forecast Singles yet…

==See Also==
*[[Compositions of the Decade 1 - Introduction]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 2 - Doubles]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 3 - Minor]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 4 - Triples]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 5 - Major]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 6 - Caters]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 7 - Royal]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 8 - Cinques]]
[[Category: Composition Reviews]]

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 8 - Cinques

2009-12-23T10:32:42Z

Pje24:

__NOTOC__
===A Review by Philip Earis - continued===
Cinques feels very claustrophobic at the moment, imprisoned by the irrational and still-increasing proportion of Stedman that is rung at this stage.

===By the numbers===
11-bell peals are up 9% over the decade compared with the 1990s. However, the real story is the method distribution within these peals.

Peals of Stedman Cinques are up 14%, and indeed now account for about 88% of rung 11-bell peals. The Stedman domination of the stage is increasing apace - peals of Grandsire are down 22% in absolute terms, falling to about 10% of rung cinques peals. Throw in a very small smattering of Erin and Plain Bob, and that completes the show. There is nothing else happening at all. No new methods, no spliced, nothing.

The decade has seen considerable compositional effort within the framework of Stedman, to be sure. Peals contain more musical rows, pay more attention to little bells, and are more varied than the simple stodgy compositional fare served up in the past: 6 and two 19s, and all that sort of thing. Cyclic patches, all “near miss” rows, and so on, seem more of a benchmark than an exceptional feature.

This progress is of course welcome, with the caveat that it’s only welcome where complexity genuinely adds value.

===Hitting the wall===
The problem is that the current direction of development gets to the point where ever-greater compositional complexity is needed, with the “reward” of arguably ever diminishing future returns. The whole thing about Stedman is that the coursing order gets disrupted by the method. This admittedly gives the advantage that it’s fairly quick to jump between any two rows – something that PABS’ turning course software and related new tools over the decade such as MBD and David Hull’s online “prickers” have helped to master.

However, the consequent disadvantage of the property that it is quick to jump between any two rows is that music in advanced Stedman compositions tends (needs?) to be all about jumping inelegantly between desired sixes, in a “chase the row” style. Lots of bobs to disrupt the flow, lots of inelegant compositional complexity, and then a fleeting effect when the desired six arrives.

As alluded to, an intrinsic property of Stedman is that it is hard to get big-bell and little-bell runs in the same course. The best Stedman compositions of the decade have tried to overcome this in neat, systematic ways with partial success, as we shall see.

However, the method will always be working against the composer.

===A new direction?===
So what to do? Well, with Stedman I feel the structure of the method naturally leads to some coursing music potential, and there remains further scope for exploiting such effects. Whilst the decade has seen a growing realisation that four consecutive bells coursing does not constitute “tittums”, proper tittums effects – which will of course propagate for more than one six – should still exist.

For example, the following course-ends (amongst many others) should give big bell coursing music around the course-end, with little-bell music around the half course.

2476839105E
2176859403E
6472859103E

However, the real key is for people to broaden their horizons. It’s not even that peals of Stedman are rung because they have a high chance of peal success. “Stedman and score” is not a phrase I’ve heard before.

Following on from the first variable cover peals in the 1990s, the present decade has seen the introduction of spliced cinques and maximus. There is no synergistic effect here. The effect that bolting Stedman onto Bristol gives is much more often parasitic.

Rather, there are unlimited new cinques method possibilities out there, unlimited glorious compositional possibilities unconstrained by falseness. Accepted wisdom is often counter-productive, and there’s no shortage of accepted thought when it comes to Stedman Cinques. More boldness is needed.

==1) Little bell Stedman==
*5074 Stedman Cinques – Philip A B Saddleton
*5000 Stedman Cinques – Mark Eccleston – July 2009
*5007 Stedman Cinques – Mark B Davies – 2003
*5004 Stedman Cinques – Michael P A Wilby – March 2005

These four compositions exemplify some of the compositional progress of the decade, showing how little bells can finally get involved in some of the action.

The cleverest is by Philip Saddleton, a valiant attempt to exploit some intrinsic properties of the method. The composition exudes intelligent design, cycling alternately through runs involving different adjacent groups of four bells in an elegant way, using short courses of 6 sixes.

5074 Stedman Cinques
Philip A B Saddleton

1234567890E 1 3 4 6
-----------------------
908E1234567 a
-----------------------
1490E236587 b |
----------------------- |
67E90583412 - - | |
320E9418765 - - | |
8590E761234 - - | |
14E90236587 - - | |
670E9583412 - - | |
3190E248765 - - - |A |
86E90572143 - - - - | |
230E9145678 - - - | |B
5890E674321 - - | |
41E90327856 - - | |
760E9852143 - - | |
2390E145678 - - | |
----------------------- |
57E90861342 - - - - |
140E9238765 - - - - |
8590E763412 - - |
7690E854321 A |
0E912345678 c |
-----------------------
2314567890E 3B
-----------------------
a = 9.12.13.14.15.17.18.20.21 (22)
b = 5.6.10.13.14.15 (20)
c = 1.2.5.6.7.8.12.13.14.15.17.18.21.22 (24) Start from rounds as the last row of a quick six

18 1234; 21 4321; 18 2345; 21 5432; 18 3456; 21 6543; 21 4567; 21 7654; 24 5678; 21 8765; 24 6789; 21 9876; 24 7890; 21 0987; 75 80; Each course is 6 sixes except where shown

Mark Eccleston’s neat composition has the footnote “contains little bell runs in every course”, which seems great until you see that said runs tend to be once a course, of the same type in the same place, achieved with blocks which keep the front six bells fixed. However, I think it would be unfair to parody this as essentially analogous to “traditional” compositions which keep the back bells fixed, though – here the back bells get to rotate through a sequence of pleasant course-ends, also.

5000 Stedman Cinques
Mark Eccleston
(3241658709E)
-----------
3241657E098 s13.s15
3241650E897 2
324165E0987 s2.s10.s13.s15
3241657E980 s2.s13
324165E7890 s10.s13.s15.s22
324165E7089 1
3241657980E 1.2.s13.s15.s22
32416587E90 2.22
3241658790E 12.14.15.16.17.18.19 (20)
3241657809E s2.s10.s13.s15
-----------
325164879E0 2.s6.s10.s13.s15
3251647E098 1.s5.13.14.s15 |
3251640E897 2.s5.s14 |
325164E0987 s2.s5.s10.13.14.s15 |
3251647E980 s2.s5.13.14 | A
325164E7890 s5.s10.13.14.s15.s22 |
325164E7089 1.s5.s14 |
3251647980E 1.2.s5.13.14.s15.s22 |
32516487E90 2.s5.s14.22 |
-----------
315264879E0 s5.9.10.s14
31526487E90 A
-----------
234165879E0 s5.s6.9.10.s14.s16
23416587E90 A
-----------
214365879E0 s5.9.10.s14
-----------
Round with a bob at 1.
Start at backstroke with rounds as the fifth row of a slow six.
First Rung: Birmingham (Cathedral) on 20 Jul 2009

MBD uses what he calls his “Generation Three little-bell block (Q)”. This bespoke block is used once a part to obtain maximum little-bell runs in the same courses as the conventional 78 and 87 “tittums” and 87 handstroke home big-bell positions he uses in his three-part plan.

Each repetition of the Q blocks gives the following run types:
course six runs
3 4
5 2345 back
4 4 6543 back
5
5 4
5 65432 hand
6 4 12345 back
5
7 4
5 12345 hand
8 4 65432 back
5

Mark’s Q-block is clearly well-designed, well-employed, and deserves greater attention.

5007 Stedman Cinques (#1)
Mark B Davies
2314567890E 3 6 7 9 12 14 16 18 19
---------------------------------------
12346578E90 (a)
241365 s - |
432165 s - |
314265 s - |
254163 - s s s | Q
514623 s s s |
523614 s s s s |
263154 s s s |
214365 s s s s - |
---------------------------------------
13246587E90 (b)
341265 s -
423165 s -
21537486 s - - -
12537486 s
12346587 s s s - -
21436587 Q
---------------------------------------
1324658709E (c)
341265 s -
423165 s -
21437586 s s - -
21536487 s s -
125364 s
123465 s s -
214365 Q
---------------------------------------
a = 1 5 8 9 10 11 s13 14 15 (20 sixes)
b = s2 s7 s13 s15 18
c = 2 s7 s15 18
Contains:
23 567890E, 7 near misses, 42 LB5 front & back, 79 LB4 front & back.

Michael Wilby takes a similar approach, using a customised block to generate little-bell runs and applying it to several established back-bell positions. By introducing a few additional turning courses, he also churns out all 10 near misses, and several other notable rows.

5004 Stedman Cinques
Michael P A Wilby
(3241658709E) 1 5 6 7 9 14 16 18 19
--------------------------------------
3241657890E 2.12.14.16.17.18.19 (20 sixes)
3124 1s.10s.18
2134 - s
--------------------------------------
14236578E90 - s - |
532461 - s s |
4352 s s - |
315264 - s s | A
314265 s s s |
325164 s s |
324165 s s s - - |
--------------------------------------
1342658790E 2.7s.9.10.13s.15.16.18s
--------------------------------------
213465E7908 7s.9s.15.16.18
324165 A*
--------------------------------------
2351748690E 3s.6.7.12.15s
123475869E0 1.6.7.9.10.16s.18
2143758609E 1.7s.9s.18
--------------------------------------
21346587E90 2s.3.9s.12.15s.18
324165 A*
--------------------------------------
2134658709E 2.7s.15s.18
324165 A*
--------------------------------------
A* = A, without - at 1

Start at backstroke with rounds as the fifth row of a slow six.
NB the first call (2) is at the first six end of the peal.
Contains all 10 near misses, tittums, and little-bell rollups.
First Rung: Birmingham Cathedral on 14 Mar 2005

''Addition 23/12/9: I think I didn’t use the best examples to illustrate what can be achieved with little bell music. For example the Mark Eccleston composition below includes his ‘A’ block, which arguably has an advantage of the MBD Q-block and Michael Wilby’s block (and the “chase the run” type compositions also), in that it provides little-bell runs mid course, but not at the expense of “nice” course ends. For example, MBD’s Q block moves the 5th and 6th all over the place at the course ends.''

''Further, the Eccleston A-block also avoids the “chase-the-run” compositional trap by allowing the music to be enjoyed for a more sustained period before and after the course-end. In other words, the music doesn’t risk being lost in the plethora of calls, as can be the case in the fiendish 1-parts such as the DGH 10000 I highlighted.''

''Mark’s composition illustrates the concept nicely (and is a better example of what can be done with little bell music than his 5000 which I included before):''

5004 Stedman Cinques
(3241658709E)
-----------
325164789E0 2.s10.s13.s15.s19
23416578E90 s1.s5.s14.s16.s19
3241 s5.s14.s16
-----------
3251647890E s6.12.14.15.16.17.18.19 (20)
234165 s5.s14.s16.s19
3241 s5.s14.s16
1234 s1.7.9.10.s16.19
-----------
2134658709E s2.s7.s10.s13.s15
1423 3.4.s12.16.17.18
12537486 3.4.12.17.s19
1352 s9.s11.s20 |
124375 s6.s9.s11.s20 |
2143 s7.s11.s20 |
16432587 s3.12.s14.s16 | A
264315 s14 |
325164 s7.s9.s14.s16.18.19 |
234165 s5.s14.s16.s19 |
3241 s5.s14.s16
-----------
1234658790E s1.7.s9.s16.19
12537486 s3.12.19
23416587 A
3241 s5.s14.s16
-----------
12346587E90 1.7.s9.s16.19
12537486 s3.12.19
23416587 A
324165879E0 s5.s10.s14.s16
-----------
Round with a bob at 1
Start from rounds as the fifth row of a slow six
Contains all near misses; 48 x 23456s; 24 x 6543s; 12 x 9876543s; 9 x 2345s; 9 x 3456s; 6 x 876543s; 3 x 5432s; 3 x 9876s
Rung at Ashton-under-Lyne 04.05.09

''I understand that Mark has also composed a peal of 5000 S11 that tries to combine the benefits of the frequent musical sixes brought up in a “turning course” composition with the added benefit of carefully-crafted courses which offer little bell music in the interior of almost all of the courses. Watch this space!''

==2) “All-in” Stedman Cinques – David Hull – September 2009==
Drawing on Stedman trends over the decade, many of which he instigated, David put together a “turning-course dominated” double-peal of Stedman which is a very significant challenge to call. He successfully shows that a peal can generate lots of musical rows of Stedman, with rapid transitions.

Indeed, this composition beautifully exemplifies recent Stedman cinques compositional trends, as well as simultaneously highlights both the intrinsic strengths, limitations and weaknesses of the method.

10000 Stedman Cinques
1234567890E Sixes
123456E9780 S1.4.5.6.7.9.S12.13.14.15.16.17.18 18
21E90785634 S2.S4.5.6.9.S12.13 16
7890E123456 3.4.S6.9.10 12
7864523E190 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
234567890E1 3.4.6.7.9.10 12
2310E896745 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
5193276E480 2.6.S8.S14.S16 18
5463217890E 1.2.3.5.7.9.10.11.12.16 18
23145678E90 1.7.8.9.10.11.S13.15.16 20
3421 S16.18 |
4132 S16.18 | A
1243 S16.18 |
E1089674523 S2.4.S6.S13.14.17 18
E1352749608 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
1E860492735 6.S8.9.11.13.15 16
1E234567890 4.6.9.11.13 14
1423E098765 3.S5.6.8.S10.11.14.18.20.22.25.27 28
4312 S16.18
3421 S7.S9.18
4357698E021 6.S8.9.11.13.15 16
132540E8967 2.6.9.10.11.S14.15 16
1423E975680 3.4.5.S7.8.12.13.S15.17.18 18
2134 A
213465E7908 1.2.3.4.S5.S7.S9.12.14.15.16 18
3241 A
3152648709E S10.S15.18.19
31527486 3.4.12.S17
32516487 3.4.12.17.18
231465 6.7.S9.18
3421 3.4.S12.16.17.18 |
4132 3.4.S12.16.17.18 | B
1243 3.4.S12.16.17.18 |
21E09876543 6.S8.9.11.13.15 16
E9753124680 S1.S4.5.S8.10 10
879E0123456 S1.3.7.S10 10
786452391E0 5.6.8.S11.12.13.15.16 16
E1902345678 S2.4.6.8.9.10.11.12.13.14 14
E019 18
09E1 S16.18
90E1 S16
908674523E1 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
4567890E123 3.4.6.7.9.10 12
453120E8967 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
0E123456789 3.4.6.7.9.10 12
0E978563412 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
567890E1234 3.4.6.7.9.10 12
1543E276980 S3.4.S6.S9.10.12.S15.18.19.20 20
213546798E0 1.3.4.6.9.11 12
7654321E098 3.4.S7.9.10 12
768091E3254 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
12345E67890 S1.2.3.4.S11.12.13.14 14
43125678E90 1.3.5.10.14.16.17.18 18
1423 A
9785634120E S4.S6.S8.11.12.S14 14
E0981234567 6.7.8.9.11.13.15.16.18.20.23.25 26
674523819E0 2.4.6.8.9.10.11.12.13.14 14
4362850719E 1.2.4.S6.9 10
13E29078564 6.8.10.11.13.15 16
14236587 2.S7.8.S11.S14.15 16
2134 A
4132E098765 S5.6.8.S11.12.14.18.20.22.25.27 28
1243 S16.18
2134 S7.S9.18
12537486E90 S1.5.8.11.12.13.14 16
124375869E0 S10.S19
2134 S7.S9.18
1234 S16
2134658709E 1.3.4.12.16.17
3241 B
0E869472513 S1.2.3.4.6.7.S11.12.13.S15 16
0E351729486 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
089E7654321 4.6.S9.11.13 14
2314657890E S1.S5.S7.9.10.13.S15 16
2314568790E 1.S4.5.S7.8.9.S12.S14.15.16.17.18 18
231465E7908 S1.S4.5.S7.8.9.S11.12.13.14.15.16.17.18 18
1243 A
23517496E80 3.S12.13.S16.18.19.22
Full slow six start.
Rounds in 4 changes.

===3) Stedman Cinques on a “magnificent six” plan – PABS – 2003===
One of a very small number of compositions of cinques to take a different approach, Philip Saddleton here employs the concepts of the “magnificent 6” caters / royal compositions in a 44-part cinques composition.

Stedman clearly lacks advantages of Erin here, at using the plain method to transition between a row and its reverse. The concept is right, the execution here interesting and elegant without being knock-out.

5016 Stedman Cinques by Philip A B Saddleton
(after P J Earis)
2314567890E
-----------
35179E24680 a
9807654321E b
-----------
61E72839405 b
12E34567890 a
-----------
11-part
a = 2s.4.5.7.8.11s.14.16s.20 (20)
b = 1s.4s.6.7.9s.12s.16.18 (18)
Queens; Tittums; Back rounds;

==See Also==
*[[Compositions of the Decade 1 - Introduction]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 2 - Doubles]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 3 - Minor]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 4 - Triples]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 5 - Major]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 6 - Caters]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 7 - Royal]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 9 - Maximus]]
[[Category: Composition Reviews]]

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 7 - Royal

2009-12-23T09:51:29Z

Pje24:

__NOTOC__
===A Review by Philip Earis - continued===
Royal ringing has greatly improved over the decade, becoming much sharper and more focused. Progress has occurred across the board, with a shift to better established methods, the appearance of some cracking and daring new methods, and a trend towards smarter and neater “runny” compositions, without fear of conventional dogmas.

These trends have been further extrapolated with the widespread development of both cyclic compositions, along with some great new cyclic methods also. Furthermore, as we shall see other very new types of compositions have also established a foothold.

===Established Methods===
Turning first to single-method peals in established methods, the decade has enjoyed a marked transition towards better methods with more musical potential.

Ten-bell peal numbers overall seem to show a sustained rise compared with the 1990s. Peals of Yorkshire royal are up 25%.

However, the biggest trend by far has been the stratospheric rise in Bristol. There have been 718 peals of Bristol Royal published so far since the beginning of the year 2000, a massive 120% rise on the 326 from the 1990s. Peal bands around the country, perhaps especially in the North West, have been attracted to the beautiful elegance and music potential of the method, and their thirst for the nectar of musical compositions has been a force for progress.

Happily, there has also been a reduction in some of the nastier elements of 10-bell ringing. Peals of Rutland are down 37%, Pudsey down 43%, and spliced in 8 methods (which on ten almost invariably means one thing) down 24%.

===New methods – “regular”===
It has been a great decade for new royal methods. Triton Delight - quite simply London Royal with music off the front - was first pealed in May 1999, and there have subsequently been over 60 repeat performances. Whilst this is an indicator of progress, it is sadly a sign of some conductors’ intransigence that there have still been an order of magnitude more peals of London. This gap will surely be further eroded in the years ahead.

The two other great royal methods of the 1990s – Normanby Surprise, and Brave New World – set the scene for the developments of the 2000s. Neither stuck to tired and pointless limiting conventions – Normanby is a super double mx method with 3 consecutive blows, whilst Brave New World eschewed both conventional symmetry and plain bob leadheads to launch a cyclic odyssey.

The new methods of the present decade have continued and developed these trends, to impressive effect. Mark Davies has led the charge with “regular” (ie plain bob leadhead), coursing-dominated methods, including:

Black Pearl: &-5-4.5-2.3.2-9.8.9-6.7-6-1,1
Snow Tiger: &3-5.4-5-3.2-9.8-6-7.6-8.9,2
Raspberry Crumble: &3-5.4-5-3-2-8-56.4.3.2-8.9,2
Jennie’s Endeavour: &3-5.4-5-3-3478-58-6-7.6-8.9,2

Whilst there is little point in breaking conventions just for the sake of it, there is even less point in conventions existing just for the sake of it. It is good to see innovative examples of methods with 9ths in the notation above the treble, for just about the first time. These allow, inter alia, elegant double methods like Snow Tiger.

Incidentally, whilst I think I first published the figures for double method Snow Tiger (Royal), Mark claims an independent earlier discovery, and links it with his eponymous delight maximus method. The method is certainly good enough to fight over.

===New methods – cyclic glory===

In parallel to the above, the early years of the decade saw the arrival of a string of cyclic methods – ie methods with leadheads that are rotations of rounds. Cyclic methods cannot have conventional palindromic symmetry (at least not if started at the symmetry point). However, other symmetries can be used. The super new major method Anglia Cyclic (+-1-2367-1-7-5-36-4-2) employed rotational symmetry, but here on ten bells two new method stand out:

[http://ringing.org/main/pages/blueline?title=Double+Resurrection+Cyclic+Bob+Royal Double Resurrection (+-678-67-1-7-9-345-45-1-4-2)]
Spinning Jennie (&56.3-4.5.2-1-34-5.36.4-1.56.8.56.1,1)

The very simple right-place plain method Double Resurrection uses glide symmetry to great effect, whilst MBD’s Spinning Jennie cleverly is conventionally double (building on a Philip Saddleton idea), nominally with irregular leadheads, but is started at the treble snap to magically produce a clever cyclic method.

These both offer an incredibly concentrated musical experience and are really pleasurable to ring. If there’s one thing you take home from this whole series of articles, it should be to try ringing some cyclic royal.

===Composition trends===
The vast majority of royal peals rung continue to be in regular (ie plain bob leadhead) methods. And the compositions for these – both in what has been produced and in what is frequently rung - have both leapt forward over the decade.

Continuing a previous trend, little-bell runs have been very much at the fore – the progress is such that any new royal composition citing a “CRU” count would be laughed out of court. Compositional footnotes like “All courses contain little-bell music” have not only appeared, but become much more common - yardsticks, even.

Indeed, the trend towards runs has been extrapolated to cyclic compositions also - both pure cyclic 9- and 10-parts, and compositions including cyclic transitions, have featured prominently.

Cyclic compositions are especially attractive – and have become almost the default – in spliced, offering an easy yet potentially really musical way to achieve all-the-work for all the method. Indeed, the decade has seen the emergence of the first adventurous “bespoke” peals of spliced royal, with the methods customised to maximise the composition’s music, as we shall see.

Bespoke compositions have also taken off in single method peals, especially Bristol Royal. David Hull has led the way here – the method’s flexibility allows different tastes to be catered for. The trend has continued to other, less compliant methods – Graham Bradshaw has done some good work trying to squeeze music from Cambridge, for example (I haven’t selected these below, but see www.ringing.org for examples).

Clever tricks have also improved straight 14-course tenors-together compositions in single methods. Two-parts with just calls at M, W and H are very common, and many people might have thought all possibilities had been exhausted by the end of the 1990s. However, such 2-part compositions have expanded beyond just straight 1243657890 partend changes, with some interesting developments with 1654327890 partends.

Just like with major, a mixture of pencil-and-paper logic and the raw power of the SMC32 software have meant that many better royal compositions have been produced.

As an aside, I have no qualms about using the word “better” – with orchestral music, it’s very subjective and not meaningful to compare Mahler and Handel with a view to ranking them. However, change ringing’s constraints and formalisms mean that any effect (and hence any set of compositions) can be quantised in a systematic way. The only input is choosing a suitable metric to compare. Over the decade different composers’ metrics have started to converge, I feel, and whilst complete convergence is unrealistic (and arguably undesirable), there is still some way to go to avoid people talking across each other.

Moreover, royal compositions have seen much acceptance and uptake of less conventional calls, when used to good effect. Calls at 7ths, and indeed different bobs such as 16, 18, 123456 have all appeared, and also led to improvements in simple 2-part compositions.

Using multiple types of calls can be an elegant way to get all consecutive bells coursing, and other new types of compositions based on this “mega tittums” plan have made their first appearance. 10 bells are just about enough for the effect to be pronounced and effective.

===Summary===
Like standing on high ground and admiring the vista behind after a long walk, it’s an exhilarating time to survey the progress in 10-bell ringing. The march towards even higher ground needs to continue. Let’s just hope that the broader body of ringers catch up with the advances, and these are better reflected in what is actually frequently rung.

==1) Further improvements in two-part tenors-together compositions==

* Triton Delight – David Hull et al – 2003
* Yorkshire Surprise – Mark Davies - 2004

I’ve selected David’s Triton as the lead typical example of how simple tenors-together compositions have got better in recent decades. The grounds for inclusion could be questioned here – the composition is an improved tweak from Don Morrison based on the 1990s Hull little-bell classic “the fluke”, whilst the method has similarities to London (the overwork and leadhead group), but with substantially more music under the treble. Overall, though, I feel this shows what can be simply achieved which in the past simply was not achieved:

5040 Triton Delight
23456 M W H
42356 -
65324 - - -
43526 - -
25634 - -
34562 - s s
56342 - -
24365 - - -
Repeat

Touch contains:
Odd Even Total
xxxx567890 = 0 + 14 = 14
xxxx657890 = 0 + 14 = 14
xxxxxx2345 = 12 + 12 = 24
xxxxxx5432 = 12 + 12 = 24
xxxxxx3456 = 24 + 24 = 48
xxxxxx6543 = 24 + 24 = 48
0987xxxxxx = 70 + 0 = 70
7890xxxxxx = 42 + 0 = 42
2345xxxxxx = 8 + 8 = 16
5432xxxxxx = 6 + 6 = 12
3456xxxxxx = 14 + 14 = 28
6543xxxxxx = 14 + 14 = 28

MBD also claims a re-arrangement, changing two pairs of bobs for singles, but without extra musical gain. He’s on less shaky ground when he turns to Yorkshire. The composition below contains a great spread of little-bell music, both in variety of runs and in its distribution in the composition. The finish is especially nice, going from 24653 to 53246 in the last course of the peal.

In Mark’s words,

''“This is my absolute favourite conventional two-part… 3.5 courses of the last part are in LB5 coursing orders. I think it's absolutely fascinating that such a result is possible from a two-part structure: a very simple structure, too, that really just boils down to 2W 2H repeated, padded. To ring, it's possibly even better than the best one-part -very-nearly-almost as much music, plus all the fun of watching the second part unfold knowing what the first has foretold. Magic”. ''

Indeed.

5040 Yorkshire (No.1)
23456 M W H
---------------
24356 s
53462 s 2 2
46325 s s -
53624 - -
24365 - s s
---------------
2 part

Contains:
13 567890
13 657890
53 LB5
104 3456/6543
60 2345/5432
10 4567/7654

==2) Cyclic method compositions==

* Double Resurrection Cyclic Bob – Andrew Tibbetts – 2003
* Spinning Jennie Delight – David Pipe - 2003

As described above, Double Resurrection is a fantastic yet simple right-place plain cyclic method. It has an efficient structure and glide symmetry, leading to reverse runs round every half-lead, and forward runs round every leadhead.

The composition below is the first to combine the excellent “magnificent 6” rounds -> queens transition on 10 bells with the benefit of a cyclic method to fully exploit the effect. And the effect is truly mesmerising. I find it hard to fully describe its joys to those who haven’t experienced it.

1234567890 (rounds)
----------
1357924680 (queens)
1594837260 (reverse tittums)
1987654320 (reverse rounds)
1864297530 (reverse queens)
1627384950 (tittums)
1234567890 (rounds)

The plain nature of the method means that varied music appears very frequently, in a continuous “music box” demonstration. This, coupled with the rapid forward / reverse nature of the music, further magnify the effect. Both the tittums and queens block cycles (and their reverses) sound much more appealing than you might naively expect.

(Of course, when the composition is in the “reverse rounds” section, the forward runs appear around the half-lead)

The remainder of the composition consists of singled-in courses to provide a joyful variation on the theme. It’s awesome.

5040 Double Resurrection (#6)
5 6 7 8 9 234567890
ss ss s ss 324
s s 243
(a) 357924680
ss s 375
(a) 594837260
s 549
(a) 987654320
6 ss s 978
(a) 864297530
ss s 846
(a) 627384950
s 672
(b) 432567890
s 423
s s 234567890

(a)=2,s3,s5,7,8,9,s12 (12 leads)

Of course, the “magnificent six” transition can also be captured in a composition using methods with plain bob leadheads. The four-lead block 1,2,4 has been used in a number of David Hull Bristol Royal compositions to achieve this effect (more on this later), and can be extrapolated to a whole peal composition. Rob Lee put together the following:

5220 Double Coslany/10440 Bristol:

234567890
---------------------
1, 2, 4 864297530
1, 2, 4 594837260
4 602374859
2, 3, 4 972640853
2, 3, 4 342907856
s1, s8, 9 345678902
---------------------
9 part. Contains the 54 cycles of rounds, queens & tittums and reverses thereof.

This exploits the regular nature of the method, using half the plain course to join up the reverse tittums/tittums and reverse rounds/rounds positions. As Rob explains,

''“…Doing this means that some of the part ends occur at handstroke instead of backstroke, and so the 1,2,4 block is used in reverse when this is the case. Unfortunately, the cyclic part end obtained is 567890234 which means rounds occurs after 3 parts. A bit of fiddling around solves this, but at the expense of a bit of symmetry/music”''

Going back to cyclic methods, a further example of what can be achieved is with the treble-dodging method Spinning Jennie. The method is conventionally double with the following notation:

&56.3-4.5.2-1-34-5.36.4-1.56.8.56.1, 1 = 1485309627

However, ringing this starting away from the symmetry point brings up the cyclic method:

+x4.5.2x1x34x5.36.4x1.56.8.56.1.56.8.56.1x4.36.5x34x1x2.5.4x3.56.1.56.3 = 1345678902

The music isn’t as concentrated or dare I say pronounced as Resurrection, but still allows some very interesting effects. David Pipe put together the following composition, designed to bring out the runs given by the method.

5000 Spinning Jennie Delight Royal
1234567890
-------------------------------------
1543267890 s4.s4½
1452367890 3.4
1325476980 s4.s4½.s7.s9
1325476809 9
1234568709 3.4.7
1345627890 s1.3.5.s8
1436578902 3.4.7.9
1243658709 7.8 (8 leads)
1243658079 s9
1243650987 s½.8.9
1234569078 4.5.8.9
1234560987 8.9
1325460897 3.4.s9
1234567890 s½.3.4
-------------------------------------
Backstroke-snap start and finish.

Bob = 38, Single = 389 both made at the backstroke-snap.
Half-lead single = 89

There remains an opportunity for a magnificent 6 style composition here, I feel.

==3) Bespoke cyclic royal compositions – David Pipe – April 2003 / October 2003==

David Pipe’s 9-part and 10-part spliced royal compositions are a sort of contraction of his classic maximus compositions on a similar plan.

The methods in the royal peals – named after James Bond villains – are all custom-designed to yield a feast of music in the leads they appear in the composition. The new methods used, such as Goldfinger, are also intrinsically very attractive.

A link method is used to move the bells between the cyclic parts. The main block of the composition has the 2nd and the tenor of that cyclic part (so in the 9-part composition, bells 5 and 6 in the first part) alternately ringing “pivot leads”, ie the leads where they are the pivot bell.

Pivot leads are almost invariably the most musical in a method, and this structure yields a great way to ring as many plain leads in the part as possible, benefitting from an elegant palindromic structure which leads to a great balance of forward and reverse runs in each part.

Unlike maximus, a cyclic royal composition of primarily treble-dodging (single-dodging) methods needs to contain more than just the plain leads from each cyclic part to take the length over 5000 changes. In the Pipe compositions, the “padding” is based on two blocks of three bobs.

“Padding” is an unfair word as these sections are also very well-chosen, though. Custom-designed methods are again used for the best effect – for example, Kananga, which yields limited music off the front in the plain course, but much more in the 243 course in which it actually appears in the composition.

All in all, two finely crafted examples. (David Hull also has a similar, later composition containing methods with “opposite” pivot bells)

''Clarification: David Hull points out that, "The 9-part Hull composition was actually composed and rung first, based on David Pipe's ideas from his Maximus compositions. David (Pipe) then produced his own take on this plan, increasing the roll-up count in the process, as well as a 10-part, both of which were rung soon after. The Hull 10-part has yet to receive an outing (and would probably be recomposed from scratch if I ever got around to it)"''

5022 Spliced Royal (8m) - DJP
234567890 Oddjob Little Alliance
-453028967 Ourumov Surprise
342590786 Zorin Surprise
-345028967 Kananga Surprise
-534028967 Scaramanga Alliance
452390786 Goldfinger Surprise
305846279 Dr No Differential Surprise
249573608 Blofeld Alliance
083657492 Blofeld Alliance
927465830 Dr No Differential Surprise
860739524 Goldfinger Surprise
796284053 Scaramanga Alliance
-867902345 Kananga Surprise
-786902345 Zorin Surprise
897264053 Ourumov Surprise
-678902345
9 part

720 each Dr No Differential S., Goldfinger S., Kananaga S., Ouromov S., Zorin S.; 648 each Blofeld A., Scaramanga A.; 126 Oddjob Little A.; 125 changes of method, all the work

5000 Spliced Royal (8m)
8901234567 Nick Nack
-------------------------------------
-1908674523 Largo Alliance
1897056342 Zorin Surprise
-1890674523 Kananga Surprise
-1089674523 Scaramanga Alliance
1907856342 Drax Little Alliance
1860492735 Dr No Differential
1795038264 Jaws Little Alliance
1648203957 Jaws Little Alliance
1573920486 Dr No Differential
1426385079 Drax Little Alliance
1352749608 Scaramanga Alliance
-1423567890 Kananga Surprise
-1342567890 Zorin Surprise
1453729608 Largo Alliance
-1234567890
-------------------------------------
10 part

800 Dr No Differential S, Kananga S, Zorin S; 640 Largo A; 600 Jaws Little A; 560 Drax Little A, Elektra A; 240 Nick Nack Differential Little Hybrid; 139 changes of method, All the work for all 10 bells

24 each 123456, 234567, 345678, 456789, 567890 at the back

''Addition: David Hull also adds, "One other point that Philip doesn't mention and which I think is worthy of note is another DJP idea, that of using non-plain bob lead-head methods in the "padding" to allow you to ring musical leads without the bells in the plain course position but also without the need to have some messy rows in the middle of the lead to get the bells into the right order for a "proper" half-lead. David has used this in some of his more recent compositions rung on handbells, and Fulford and Acomb in the composition below also use this feature:''

5004 8 methods Spliced Royal
David G Hull
234567890 Skeldergate Bridge Little Alliance
- 453028967 Fulford Delight
524390786 Acomb Delight
- 345028967 Mulberry Hall Little Alliance
- 534028967 London No.3 Surprise
452390786 Horsleydown Surprise
305846279 Sgurr Differential Surprise
249573608 Copmanthorpe Delight
083657492 Copmanthorpe Delight
927465830 Sgurr Differential Surprise
860739524 Horsleydown Surprise
796284053 London No.3 Surprise
- 867902345 Mulberry Hall Little Alliance
- 786902345 Acomb Delight
679284053 Fulford Delight
- 678902345
9 part

720 each Acomb Delight, Copmanthorpe Delight, Fulford Delight, Horsleydown Surprise, London No.3 Surprise, Sgurr Differential Surprise; 504 Mulberry Hall Little Alliance; 180 Skeldergate Bridge Little Alliance; 125 changes of method, all the work.

In a related field, the late John Leary put together a series of 30 spliced royal methods in a cyclic 9-part construction. Whilst this doesn’t have the same bespoke qualities of the Pipe compositions (for example lacking a pivot-lead structure in the plain course), it contains many interesting methods and neat leads.

The composition is simply four bobs at Before to bring up the cyclic part-end 1902345678. The methods are well-structured, with some very nice new methods created for the peal (see for example Bramall Lane, b& 3-56.4-56-6-4-5.4.56.4.5-56-1, 2).

The composition was first rung (in shortened form) in 2007, and forms the basis for longer lengths of royal to be attempted shortly – sadly John isn’t around to complete his good work. The effort to expand the composition has involved some additions from David Hull and some very recent distributed further progress. Watch this space…

234567890
573920486 Beginning
648203957 Kenilworth Road
089674523 Loftus Road
860492735 Bristol
907856342 Stinking Bishop
795038264 Nideggen
426385079 Otterbourne
352749608 Bramall Lane
- 908674523 Savernake
897056342 Kegworth
069482735 Fereneze
640293857 Gresty Road
234567089 Burnden Park
352748690 Allington
573829406 St Neots
- 906482735 Burnley
698074523 Jugsholme
867950342 Kananga
785639204 Lufkin
420395678 Thimbleby
352748069 Essex
234507986 Clifton
- 904263857 Quixwood
573826049 Craven Cottage
785634290 Kings Norton
867459302 Southampton University
496082735 Goldfinger
352708964 City Ground
230597486 Stratford upon Avon
- 902345678 Elgin

===4) Further improvements in two-part tenors-together compositions – 1654327890 partends===

* Yorkshire Surprise – Mark Davies - 2002
* Yorkshire Surprise – David Pipe – 2009
* Bristol Surprise – John Warboys – c2006

Whilst many previous examples of two-part compositions involved the partend 1243657890, the decade saw the emergence of some interesting examples with a partend 1654327890.

This framework is elegant, with the clear attraction that wherever a run involving bells 2,3,4,5,6 appears in the first half of the composition, a corresponding reverse run will delight in the second half.

[This effect isn’t guaranteed in 2-parts with a 124365 partend – see for example the 2nd part of Chris Poole’s 5080 #2 (MIVMHHMW)

Mark Davies created some 2-parts of Yorkshire on this new plan in 2002, though waited 7 years before publishing (after a very tidy new DJP composition on this theme was published);

5040 Yorkshire Surprise Royal (DJP)
M W H 23456
- 2 24536
2 3 43526
- X 65432
2-part
X=16

5040 Yorkshire Surprise Royal, arr MBD (SMC32)
No.1 (local scope)
23456 M W B H
24536 - 2
53624 - x
46325 - -
24365 -
53462 - -
65432 -
2 part, x = 16

5040 Yorkshire Surprise Royal, arr MBD (SMC32)
No.2 (local scope)
M W H 23456
- - 64352
2 2 53462
s s 24365
s 23465
s - 65432
2 part

John Warboys, Don Morrison and other have also explored this effect. A simple example by John is his Bristol Royal:

5040 Bristol S. Royal
23456 V O I
35426 -
32546 2 -
46325 - 2
43652 x
65432 - -
2-part. x = 167890.
All courses contain little-bell music.

===5) Bespoke single-method compositions of Bristol Royal – David Hull – various===

Also:
* Bristol / Triton / Yorkshire – Chris Poole
* Eg Jennie’s Endeavour – Mark Davies

There are different schools of thought about Bristol Royal peal compositions. Neat tenors-together peals, especially two-parts, are well-suited to 8ths place calls. (John Warboys’ example above being just one example).

Indeed, Mark Davies goes so far to stated on his website that,

''“From a musical perspective, Bristol Royal is better with 8th's place bobs; with an average of only just over one call per course possible with 4th's place bobs, the linking possibilities are very slim, making it very hard to stay in good courses and avoid the bad. 4th's place calls are also bad news for those who like their course-end rollups”''

I feel this is too much of a generalisation. As mentioned in the introduction, Bristol Royal ringing and compositions have undergone a renaissance in the past decade. Much of this has been down to bespoke compositions, many by David Hull.

David’s use of the four-lead block 1,2,4 to achieve the magnificent six transition has already been mentioned. Similar motifs, such as the six-lead block S2.S4.S6 to act as a cyclic shunt (whilst going from forward to reverse runs) are also very well employed in his compositions.

An example well-rounded composition illustrative of the progress is:

5002 Bristol Surprise Royal (no.10)
234567890 Leads
243 SH
56342 SM.W
7654382 7ths.Out
902345678 1.3 3
987654320 7.13 21
357924680 1.2.4 4
627384950 1.2.4 4
987654230 S1.2.4 4
432567890 3.9.11 11
423 SH
(53624) M.W
24365 M.SW.SH
(42536) W.M.SW

First rung at Northallerton, 21 July 2007

It should be mentioned that various other composers have played with neat transition blocks as well. For example, Chris Poole has various nice compositions here – in Bristol he uses 7 & 8 lead courses called (3, 4½) and (2½, 4) for a cyclic shift (alternating the stroke of runs also), whilst analogous 8 & 9 lead blocks in Triton called (1, 3) also lead to notable compositions:

5160 Triton Delight Royal
234567890
----------------------------
354769820 1 3 (8)
456789023 1 3 (9)
576982043 1 3 (8)
678902345 1 3 (9)
798204365 1 3 (8)
890234567 1 3 (9)
920436587 1 3 (8)
023456789 1 3 (9)
243657089 1 4 (8)
243659078 5 (9)
243657890 4 5 (9)
34625 1 3 5 8 (8)
64523 1 (9)
35426 1 9 (9)
23456 8 (9)

As a related example, Chris has also exploited the simple effect of calling pairs of bobs on a series of bells to achieve a nice simple Yorkshire composition from 2001:

5162 Yorkshire Surprise Royal (No. 2)
234567890
--------------------------
902345678 2,10,11,19 (23)
789023456 2,10,11,19 (23)
543209876 2,10 (16)
765432098 2,10,11,19 (23)
987654320 2,10,11,19 (23)
524367890 2,10,12 (16)
(324) s5
Call paired bobs on 10-6, 6-10 followed by W sW.

Finally in this section I feel it’s appropriate to highlight an example of a bespoke composition in a great new method. I’ve selected this composition of the previously-mentioned Jennie's Endeavour Surprise Royal – both the method and composition are by Mark Davies.

The method is f-group royal with a feature that appeared a number of times in new methods over the decade: regular handstroke half-leads (so backrounds appears in the plain course at handstroke).

The consequence of this is that calls at the half-lead have the opposite effect to leadend calls. In MBD’s words,

''“This means rapid and unexpected jumps from one position to another can be carried out, and without having to trawl through undesirable leads. Part of the goal of this peal was to provide something really exciting and unpredictable, so the band never knows what is going to come up next”''

The composition makes good use of this property, utilising four types of calls to pack in a varied heap of music. The method is coursing-dominated, and to exploit this the composition also contains sections of what MBD slightly ambitiously calls “tittums” (here four consecutive bells coursing). Again, to quote the loquacious MBD,

''“Coursing orders are often revisited unexpectedly, and the same backbell positions are brought up in different ways. Both the front bells and the back bells are turned around on average more than once a course, but despite the dynamic movement the little bells remain throughout the peal in coursing orders which provide runs of varying kinds”''

5000 Jennie's Endeavour Surprise Royal
234567890
---------
65432 1 8 9 (MWH)
62345 3½ 4½ 5½ 8
43526 1 8 (MW)
435267089 4
243657890 3½ X 7½
325460987 s3½ s4 s5 s5½ 8 9
674523890 3½ s4 4½ s5 5½ 7
634527089 4 s7
234569078 s1 5
354269870 3 3½ 4½ s7½ 9
645237890 ½ s4 4½ 5½ 8½
645239078 4 5
632547890 ½ 3½ 4½ 5½ 8 8½
23456 1 (M)
---------

4th's place calls at lead end, with:
½ = half-lead bob, pn 70
s½ = half-lead single, pn 7890
X = big bob before (pn 16, lead 4)

Contains:
Entire plain course
7 567890
5 657890
9 098765 off the front
193 LB4
113 LB5
46 xxxxxx0987/7890xxxxxx
7 xxxxx09876/67890xxxxx
38 leads in the Tittums
...and various other goodies.

===6) Mega-tittums on 10 – David Pipe and Philip Earis – 2006 onwards===
Following on from the previous composition, a much more complete tittums effect can be achieved if every consecutive bell is coursing. And whilst there had already been a trend in recent years of compositions using more tittums-style coursing orders, such as (7)65432, the “mega tittums” effect of all consecutive bells coursing was really exploited for the first time in the decade.

To easily get the bells in the mega-tittums order from the plain course, a sequence of bobs of different sizes can be used in the same carefully selected calling position (for example in royal, 8ths, 6ths and 4ths place bobs when the tenor runs out).

In a more conventional tenors-together framework, a lone 4ths place call will go into mega-tittums from coursing order 65432. The tenors-together composition below, predominantly with 8ths place bobs, illustrates things nicely.

5000 Bristol S Royal (DJP)
----------------------
V O I H 23456
- 34256
- - 45362
-* 453627089
3 - - 563427890
- - 34562
- - 46325
- - 64523
2 3 - 42356
- 23456
---------------------
* 4ths place call

The more bells there are, and the more coursing-dominated the chosen method is, the more incredible the mega-tittums effect. We’ll have to wait for 12 bells and higher stages before manifestations of the full glory of mega-tittums though…

===7) Spliced Surprise (9-14m), tenors together, atw – Richard Pearce – Summer 2001===
The decade has also seen clever arrangements of more “old school” one-part spliced royal, keeping the tenors together whilst preserving the all-the-work property.

Building on work of Roddy Horton and Graham John, Richard Pearce has created a series of tenors-together spliced in 9-14 methods on this plan.

As explained in the comprehensive ringing-theory message of December 2006 (http://www.bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2006-December/001666.html), the composition is based on sets of courses with the bells in 2nds, 5ths and 6ths rotated. This allows some familiar methods to be included, along with a change of method every lead and a fairly even method distribution.

5160 (14 methods)
23456 M W H
53462 s s R/LEGL/YSRYSRY
63452 s SR/EGLE
53426 s s G/Y/L
42365 s s - EGLE/S/G/
52364 s AKIAKIAK/DC
62354 s ND/IAKIAKIA
(52364) s K/
34265 s - CNDCN/I/
23465 - BPBPBP/
63425 s LEGLEGLE/R
42356 s s - YSRYSRY/GLEG/SRYSRYS/
(52346) s DC/
62345 s AKIAKIA/ND
52346 s CNDCNDC/K
34256 s - I/NDCNDCN/
64253 s R/B
(54236) s s PBPBP/C/
23456 s - BPBPBP/L/
400 each Cambridge, London No 3, Rutland; 360 each Anglia, Bristol, Eardleigh, Irvine, Kegworth (G), Kinross, Lincolnshire (N), Nideggen (D), Pudsey, Superlative No 2, Yorkshire; 128 com, atw.

==See Also==
*[[Compositions of the Decade 1 - Introduction]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 2 - Doubles]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 3 - Minor]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 4 - Triples]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 5 - Major]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 6 - Caters]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 8 - Cinques]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 9 - Maximus]]
[[Category: Composition Reviews]]

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 9 - Maximus

2009-12-23T09:34:19Z

Pje24:

__NOTOC__
===A Review by Philip Earis - continued===
12-bell ringing has enjoyed a strong decade. Single-method ringing has continued its advance towards better methods and better compositions, but the developments – although significant – have often felt more like evolution than revolution. With spliced maximus, though, a real step change for the better has taken place.

===Bristol cream===
Turning first to single methods, the decade has seen a pleasant trend to more coursing-dominated (ie more musical) methods. Towerbell peals of Bristol over the decade are up 14% to 572, with Bristol becoming the most rung single maximus method for the first time. This is a very welcome development, and a tangible sign of ringing progress. Conductors have responded accordingly, with a plethora of delightful Bristol compositions, almost universally incorporating considerable little-bell music.

In a demonstration that continual evolution leads to revolution, anecdotally it seems that very few poor Bristol Maximus compositions are rung. I don’t have statistics, but would strongly suspect that at least 90% of rung Bristol Maximus compositions date from the 1990s and present decade.

Towerbell peals of Yorkshire are up 11% to 471, whilst Cambridge is down 5% to 520. If these trends continue, Yorkshire will overtake Cambridge in the coming decade.

===Out with the old, in with the new…===
At the dodgy-method part of the spectrum (and sadly it’s a big part), it is of some comfort to see peal numbers in some “nasties” decline. The usual pantomime villain duo of Lyddington and Belvoir have happily dropped off a cliff, with two and one peals rung dis-respectively. The trio of mediocre London-over methods Newgate, Barford and Londinium have seen a collective 56% drop to 34, whilst peals of Pudsey have had a similar decline.

There have been a significant number of new methods rung for the first time, many of them rather nice. Interestingly, the good methods have sometimes resulted from new spliced compositions.

===Spliced surprises===
Indeed, it’s with spliced peals that the statistics become perhaps most striking. Now the total number of towerbell peals of spliced maximus over the decade seems pretty constant at around 340. However, what has been rung in peals of spliced has changed dramatically.

In the 1990s, 88% of towerbell peals of spliced maximus were in just spliced treble-dodging methods (and most of these just spliced surprise). However, in the 2000s that proportion falls considerably, to around 61%. The number of peals of “mixed” spliced rung (incorporating different treble paths, and so on) is up 187%, and provides some evidence that composers are using the best methods for the job much more frequently, rather than sticking to tired conventions.

Big advances in spliced composition – led by David Pipe – have driven this transition. A simultaneous boost has been given by the early adoption and active commissioning of new ideas by Tony Kench and his peal band. Cyclic compositions, including 12-parts, have become widespread. New musical concepts, including the mega-tittums coursing effect, have also been developed.

===Some much done, how much left to do?===
Composing spliced maximus involves a vast search space, meaning predominantly manual input and logic is required for the best results. Computers have played a large part in the much more constrained search spaces of tenors-together single method peals, though, again with SMC32 leading the way.

Indeed, the nine and a bit courses of tenors-together maximus is sufficiently small that David Hull published complete composition collections for methods like Cambridge over the decade. If people want to do new things here, they’ll have to broaden their horizons.

It will certainly be very interesting to see how maximus ringing develops. Perhaps discrete blocks of changes, each giving a different musical effect, might be the way forward. We shall see…

==1) Classic cyclic 11- and 12-parts using a link method approach – David Pipe – (November 1999 / September 2000 / August 2001)==
I’ve selected the “Pipe Classic” 11-part here in view of its considerable influence on the decade’s ringing and subsequent compositions. Whilst admittedly it was first rung on handbells just before the decade’s start, the first tower-bell performance was in August 2001.

As with David’s (later) analogous royal peals, the basic idea is a cyclic 11-part construction to deliver both continuous run music and the all-the-work property. The composition has no calls – the link method Slinky is used to move the bells between cyclic parts.

The main block of the composition has the 2nd and the tenor of that cyclic part (so bells 5 and 6 in the first part) alternately ringing “pivot leads”, ie the leads where they are the pivot bell. The consequent palindromic structure is both very elegant, includes all available leads in the part, and provides a super balance of forward and reverse runs in each part.

The methods used are very well-chosen: a mix between the established Ariel, Zanussi and Maypole (concentrated Bristol), and the newly-designed Phobos and Deimos, both of which deliver blockbuster leads in the composition.

Phobos is a tidy l-group method with two fishtails either side of the leadend, and plain hunt on the front six around the half-lead. The music flows well, and includes complete wraps of reverse rounds.

Deimos is the real music-box regular method of the decade in its application here. It is one of a very small number of good methods on more than six bells that has 3rds made at the half-lead (normally the kiss of death). However, by skilful use of successive plain hunting on three at different places in the row, and adding dodges whenever there are runs, marvellous wall-to-wall music is delivered throughout the chosen leads.

5016 Spliced Maximus (6m)
234567890ET Slinky Little Treble Place
4523ET90786 Deimos Alliance
534T20E8967 Phobos Surprise
24E5937T608 Maypole Alliance
3T504826E79 Ariel Surprise
E29475638T0 Zanussi Surprise
T038564729E Zanussi Surprise
9E72648503T Ariel Surprise
08T637594E2 Maypole Alliance
796E8204T53 Phobos Surprise
8607T93E524 Deimos Alliance
67890ET2345
11-part

The decade saw many variations on this plan, which are nicely chronicled on Roddy Horton’s website: [http://rrhorton.net/arkcyclic.html]

The Pipe Classic composition has methods with odd-numbered pivot bells (3 in Deimos, 5 in Maypole, 7 in Zanussi, 9 in Ariel, 11 in Phobos). As an example of a later variation, John Warboys produced a composition in “red” methods on a very similar plan, but where the methods had even-numbered pivot bells instead.

Of course, with a cyclic construction there’s a strong case to be made for all 12 bells to be involved in the runs, rather than a fixed treble creating an artificial musical “block” that disrupts the runs.

As such, David soon developed a 12-part composition on a similar plan. Being a regular double method, the plain lead of Bristol / Maypole in the 11-part structure contains the row eg 234567890ET1 when the 2nd of the part is pivoting. As all other cyclic rotations of this row occur in different parts, and rounds itself is a cyclic rotation of this row, Bristol needs to be replaced with a different method to preserve truth. Here Glazgow Little Surprise is used:

5040 Spliced Maximus (6m)
1234567890ET
Lynx Diff 64523T10E897
Deimos A 653412ET9078
Phobos S 624T503817E9
Glazgow LS 6315E4927T80
Ariel S 6T204857391E
Zanussi S 61E39574820T
Zanussi S 60T827495E31
Ariel S 6E91738504T2
Glazgow LS 6807T92E4153
Phobos S 697E8103T524
Deimos A 67890ET12345
12-part. 1152 Ariel, Phobos, Zanussi S; 864 Deimos A; 576 Glazgow LS; 144 Lynx Differential. 119 com, atw for all 12 bells.

==2) The Rise of Mega-tittums – Philip Earis, David Pipe, Philip Saddleton, Rob Lee et al – February 2006==
The possibilities given by all consecutive bells coursing have already been mentioned in the royal article. Suffice to say, the effect becomes better and more pronounced the more bells there are.

I think I first wrote about the possibilities in this February 2006 message to this list: [http://www.bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2006-February/001292.html]

There was quick collaborative progress at developing the concept, developing ways of getting from rounds into all consecutive bells coursing as quickly and elegantly as possible.

David Pipe soon realised that a sequence of different bobs in the same position could be used for this. A 10ths place bob 'out' turns the coursing order from the plain course 324 to the tittums style 432. This effect is repeated with appropriate bobs every course until mega-tittums is obtained. The effect is then reversed with the inverse bobs in the second half:

3984 Bristol Maximus
O I 234567890ET
10 342567890ET
18 453627890ET
16 564738290ET
14 675849302ET
14 2345T6E7089
16 234567T8E90
18 23456789T0E
10 234567890ET
The figures refer to the type of bob. O is an 'out' for the tenor, I is an 'in' for the 2nd. Ideal for handbells - all pairs are either in their home position or coursing.

Philip Saddleton claimed independent discovery of this, but expanded the concept to a peal length by combining this structure with a cyclic 11-part plan. This can be very easily achieved by having a single lead of the method in the mega-tittums coursing order before reversing the transpositions:

33440 Maypole Alliance (or 6072 Crayford Little Bob)
0 1ET907856423
8 1ET907862534
6 1ET908273645
4 1ET029384756
4 1890E7T62534
6 1890ET273645
8 1890ET234756
0 1890ET234567
11-part

Rob Lee recognised that mx methods could be useful in the transition between tittums / cyclic courses, and put together a prototype composition:

5104 Spliced Maximus (4m)
234567890ET Br
795E3T20486 Br
T0E89674523 Av
14 ET089674523 Or
16 0E9T8674523 Av
18 908E7T64523 Or
10 89706E5T423 Br
10 ET029384567 Av
18 0E9T8234567 Li
16 908ET234567 Or
14 890ET234567
11 part.
584 Avon D., Bristol S., Orion S., 352 Littleport Little S., 98 com, atw

I further incorporated similar ideas in spliced maximus compositions using Pipe 11-part plans, but the real crowning glory of such a fusion would take a number of month’s further development…

==3) “Jupiter” cyclic spliced 12-part on a mega-tittums plan – David Pipe – November 2007==
The aim of this composition was to combine the cyclic runs character of the Classic 11- and 12-parts with some mega-tittums music where all consecutive bells are coursing. A 12-part structure is good because it naturally supports both the cyclic runs and the mega-tittums music.

The first half of each part is aimed at generating runs, whilst the second part efficiently gets to the mega-tittums coursing order, has a principle to exploit this and simultaneously switch to another part, and then reverses the bobs to get back to the part end.

The beauty of this composition is that both these halves have wonderful custom-designed features – features which may not be immediately apparent.

1234567890ET
Io LA 142638507T9E
Chaldene LA 13527496E8T0
Leda LA 1648203T5E79
Callisto LA 157392E4T608
Europa LTP 18604T2E3957
Europa LTP 1795E3T20486
Callisto LA 108T6E492735
Leda LA 19E7T5038264
Chaldene LA 1T0E89674523
Io LA 10 bob 1ET907856423
Plain B 18 bob 1ET907862534
Plain B 16 bob 1ET908273645
Amalthea LA 14 bob 1ET029384756
Amalthea LA 1T2E30495867
Ganymede Diff 12 bob 8907E6T54123
Amalthea LA 14 bob 890ET7162534
Amalthea LA 16 bob 890ET1273645
Plain B 18 bob 890ET1234756
Plain B 10 bob 890ET1234567
12-part

As far as I know, in all previous 12-part maximus compositions the methods used were pretty conventional, ie they weren’t designed for the treble to be involved in the runs as much as possible. The result can be more artificial musical “disruptive breaks” where the treble of the part breaks up runs of other bells.

Here, however, the methods in the “runny” first half were tailor-made (with a consequent variety of treble paths) to bring out maximal music in all 12 parts, involving the treble in the runs.

In the mega-tittums second half, an intrinsic problem of the 12-part structure is that the mega-tittums coursing order is the same in each of the parts, leading to potential falseness problems.

David got round this problem by choosing methods which perhaps counter-intuitively give some runs-style music in the mega-tittums coursing order. The principle chosen here is Ganymede, which has elegant mirror symmetry as well as conventional palindromic symmetry.

The real crowning glory, though, is the use of Amalthea. Whilst this is a conventional a-group method, it is not really designed to be rung in its plain course; rather, it elegantly gives some really super runs music in the mega-tittums coursing order. The music is generates is wonderfully plentiful, but also incredibly unexpected. Runs of different types, both forward and backwards, frequently just pop out of the ether. The total effect is magical.

The composition is described more fully (including figures for the leads of Amalthea) in this November 2007 message [http://www.bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2007-November/001840.html]

==4) Single Surprise Maximus (b group)==
*5042 Cambridge - David Hull
*5040 Yorkshire - Mark Davies

The decade saw further incremental progress with single-method peals, continuing the leap in attitudes started in the 1990s, and mirroring the developments in Royal compositions that have already been discussed.

Little bells runs continued to be at the fore, and happily misguided ideas such as that all compositions need to contain three whole courses of 65s seem to have been pretty well banished. Calls at 9ths are no longer a novelty, and calls in other places are becoming more commonplace.

Big bobs are around, and look to be here to stay. This is especially relevant for tenors-together b-group methods like Cambridge and Yorkshire, where the conventional length of 5042 almost invariably sees the peal have a big “duffer” section at the end.

The two b-group compositions I’ve selected are both on slightly shaky date ground for inclusion, as they were both in fact first rung in the second half of 1999 (though to other methods, I believe)

David Hull’s Cambridge has a lovely 2-part format, great use of the calls at 9ths (and potentially 8ths), and also well illustrates the musical sacrifices that must be made at the end of a composition to produce a 5042 on the usual plan:

5042 Cambridge Surprise Maximus (#4)
Composed by: David G Hull
2345678 9 M W 8 H
54362 S S S
24365 SS S SS
63452 S S SS S
34256 SS S 2
52436 S S
(32456) S
Omit 1 SS.

Mark Davies’ composition, which he calls "The Cosmic Joker", has the very attractive property that every full course contains both little-bell music and 56/65 rollups:

5088 Yorkshire Surprise Maximus
Mark B Davies
23456 B M W H
45236 - -
54362 x s
23465 s s
43652 s 2 -
43526 x -
64523 x - -
35426 - ss -
23456 -
x = 18
Includes 83 LB5, 165 LB4, 14 567890ET and 10 657890ET

==5) Single Surprise Maximus – Bristol==
*5090 #4 – David Hull, October 2003
*5088 – James Holdsworth, September 2008
*5040 #3 – Mark Davies, January 2005

Bristol is a glorious method at all stages. Unlike something like Yorkshire, though, Bristol’s different leadhead groups at different stages mean than very different strategies need to be used on different numbers of bells to get the most of the method.

Happily Bristol Maximus doesn’t have the same intrinsic problem as b-group methods, in that a nice and musical snap finish can be achieved without much difficulty. There are literally hundreds of good tenors-together compositions to choose from here, by many composers – a nice illustrative example would be David Hull’s 5090 #4:

5090 Bristol Maximus (#4)
23456 M W H
64352 - -
45362 2
32564 - S
64523 S -
43526 - 2
(42536) SB

That said, the method is very flexible. A snap finish isn’t needed or necessarily desirable, and indeed great compositions can even exist in 2-part format.

I was very attracted to the neat simple 2-part James Holdsworth composition that employs whole courses to great effect. However, the accolades have to be reduced somewhat when you realise that DJP produced something very similar in the previous decade. Why neither of these appears in the RW diary would be a mystery if the diary’s selection criteria involved compositions having notable merit.

5088 Bristol Surprise Maximus
J W Holdsworth
23456 M 9 W H
----------------------
64352 - -
56342 -
54362 -s
24365 s
----------------------
Repeat

5088 Bristol Surprise Maximus
DJP
23456 M W H
---------------
64352 1 1
56342 1
24365 s 2*
---------------
2 part. 2*=sb.

For a further example of a composition full of little-bell music, with snappy transitions between sections and limited exposure to duffer courses, the Mark Davies composition below also shows the high bar that tenors together compositions have met:

5040 Bristol Surprise Maximus (#3)
23456 M H W
(53426) s
54326 s
56423 2 -
24365 - -
(36452) - - 2
64352 2
23456 s s
Contains 8 567890ET, 102 LB5, 213 LB4

==6) Tenors-together spliced Treble Dodging Maximus (RABS)==
*Alex Byrne – January 2008
*John Warboys – September 2009

Despite the cyclic developments of the decade, tenors-together spliced in “legacy” methods continues to be rung and developed. There have recently been two simple and very elegant compositions in the four “RABS” methods, Rigel, Avon, Bristol and Strathclyde.

Both are all-the-work, and manage to achieve this using musical courses (sometimes whole courses) throughout the compositions.

Alex Byrne’s composition is a lovely palindrome, whilst John Warboys’ uses a two-part structure. Both are well worth closer inspection.

5184 Spliced TD Maximus (4 methods)
Alex Byrne
M W H
- RRRRRR.
- AAAAAAAAAAA.BBBBBBB
2 - BBB.SAARAAS.SSSSSSSSSSS.
- - - R.RRRRR.R.
2 RBBBB.BBBBR.
- - - RRRRR.R.
2 SSSSSSSSSSS.SAARAAS.BBBBBBB
- - BBB.AAAAAAAAAAA.

5088 Spliced TD Maximus (4 methods)
John Warboys
23456 M W H
43526 2 1 AAAAAAAAAAA-SAB-BRS-
25634 1 1 R-BBASSARSS-A
46532 1 1 SRB-RRRRRRRRRRR-
24365 2 1 2 BRRA-A-RB-SRB-A-
34625 2 1 BBBBBBBBBBB-SAB-BRS-
26543 1 1 R-BBASSARSS-A
35642 1 1 SRB-SSSSSSSSSSS-
23456 2 1 2 BRRA-A-RB-SRB-A-
1296 B,R,S; 1200 A. 53 com; atw.
The full courses of R and S can be swapped if desired.

==7) “Winking up” – Ander Holroyd / Adam Shepherd – August 2000==

“Winking up” is a great concept that was briefly visited at the beginning of the decade. There hasn’t been much investigation since, but I’m convinced there could be tantalising possibilities here.

In short, “winking up” is a way of extending a method on n bells to a method on 2n bells. So for example what bell number 3 does in a minor method defines what bells 5 and 6 do in the related winked up maximus method.

This doubling lends itself to winked up methods being rung on handbells, but there’s no reason why this has to be the case.

The classic winking “algorithm” is that:

*If on the lower stage a bell makes a place, then on the winked up higher stage, the corresponding pair of bells will do a double dodge together.
*If on the lower stage a bell hunts, then on the winked up higher stage the corresponding pair of bells will ring four changes of plain hunt on four.

The practical consequence is that to wink up from minor to maximus, the following place notations map:

Minor Winked Up Maximus
- -4589-4589
14 -369-369
36 -470-470
12 -589-589
etc

This notation may not look the most elegant, but the effect can be really excellent. Pairs of bells stay together, hunting around the change like a double act.

There has been one winked up peal rung, Wee Willie Winkie Hybrid Maximus – a winked up London Minor – was rung in 2000, and this contained 1680 runs of 4 or more consecutive bells:

5184 Wee Willie Winkie Hybrid Maximus
Arranged Adam P. Shepherd
34567890ET
----------
- 09TE784365 2
- 567890ET43 1
- 34906587ET 1
- 349078TE65 4
p 87345609TE 1
----------
6 part
Bob = 369-369 for final 589-589

Wee Willie Winkie Hybrid Maximus:
-470-470-4589-4589-470-470-369-369-4589-4589-234589-589-4589-4589-45670-470-36789-369-4589-4589-369-369
-470-470-36789-369-4589-4589-369-369-470-470-4589-4589-589-589-4589-4589-369-369-470-470-4589-4589
-470-470-589-589 (lh 128734TE6590)

Further applications can be found, I am sure. At the least, such ringing would make an interesting and very different-sounding block inserted into in a more conventional peal composition. The possibilities could be considerable – winking up cyclic methods, or tittums coursing orders, maybe. Or perhaps winky effects could be used with non-adjacent bells.

Of course, it’s not just six bell methods that can be winked up. I have vague recollections of ringing winked up Banana Doubles to create a fruity 10 bell method, as well as the memorable experience of winking up twice plain hunt on three, so it turned into a 12-bell method (the double winking was conceptually a bit tricky, at least at first, except for PABS).

There’s mileage in Shipping Forecast Singles yet…

==See Also==
*[[Compositions of the Decade 1 - Introduction]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 2 - Doubles]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 3 - Minor]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 4 - Triples]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 5 - Major]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 6 - Caters]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 7 - Royal]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 8 - Cinques]]
[[Category: Composition Reviews]]

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 8 - Cinques

2009-12-22T17:36:06Z

Pje24:

__NOTOC__
===A Review by Philip Earis - continued===
Cinques feels very claustrophobic at the moment, imprisoned by the irrational and still-increasing proportion of Stedman that is rung at this stage.

===By the numbers===
11-bell peals are up 9% over the decade compared with the 1990s. However, the real story is the method distribution within these peals.

Peals of Stedman Cinques are up 14%, and indeed now account for about 88% of rung 11-bell peals. The Stedman domination of the stage is increasing apace - peals of Grandsire are down 22% in absolute terms, falling to about 10% of rung cinques peals. Throw in a very small smattering of Erin and Plain Bob, and that completes the show. There is nothing else happening at all. No new methods, no spliced, nothing.

The decade has seen considerable compositional effort within the framework of Stedman, to be sure. Peals contain more musical rows, pay more attention to little bells, and are more varied than the simple stodgy compositional fare served up in the past: 6 and two 19s, and all that sort of thing. Cyclic patches, all “near miss” rows, and so on, seem more of a benchmark than an exceptional feature.

This progress is of course welcome, with the caveat that it’s only welcome where complexity genuinely adds value.

===Hitting the wall===
The problem is that the current direction of development gets to the point where ever-greater compositional complexity is needed, with the “reward” of arguably ever diminishing future returns. The whole thing about Stedman is that the coursing order gets disrupted by the method. This admittedly gives the advantage that it’s fairly quick to jump between any two rows – something that PABS’ turning course software and related new tools over the decade such as MBD and David Hull’s online “prickers” have helped to master.

However, the consequent disadvantage of the property that it is quick to jump between any two rows is that music in advanced Stedman compositions tends (needs?) to be all about jumping inelegantly between desired sixes, in a “chase the row” style. Lots of bobs to disrupt the flow, lots of inelegant compositional complexity, and then a fleeting effect when the desired six arrives.

As alluded to, an intrinsic property of Stedman is that it is hard to get big-bell and little-bell runs in the same course. The best Stedman compositions of the decade have tried to overcome this in neat, systematic ways with partial success, as we shall see.

However, the method will always be working against the composer.

===A new direction?===
So what to do? Well, with Stedman I feel the structure of the method naturally leads to some coursing music potential, and there remains further scope for exploiting such effects. Whilst the decade has seen a growing realisation that four consecutive bells coursing does not constitute “tittums”, proper tittums effects – which will of course propagate for more than one six – should still exist.

For example, the following course-ends (amongst many others) should give big bell coursing music around the course-end, with little-bell music around the half course.

2476839105E
2176859403E
6472859103E

However, the real key is for people to broaden their horizons. It’s not even that peals of Stedman are rung because they have a high chance of peal success. “Stedman and score” is not a phrase I’ve heard before.

Following on from the first variable cover peals in the 1990s, the present decade has seen the introduction of spliced cinques and maximus. There is no synergistic effect here. The effect that bolting Stedman onto Bristol gives is much more often parasitic.

Rather, there are unlimited new cinques method possibilities out there, unlimited glorious compositional possibilities unconstrained by falseness. Accepted wisdom is often counter-productive, and there’s no shortage of accepted thought when it comes to Stedman Cinques. More boldness is needed.

==1) Little bell Stedman==
*5074 Stedman Cinques – Philip A B Saddleton
*5000 Stedman Cinques – Mark Eccleston – July 2009
*5007 Stedman Cinques – Mark B Davies – 2003
*5004 Stedman Cinques – Michael P A Wilby – March 2005

These four compositions exemplify some of the compositional progress of the decade, showing how little bells can finally get involved in some of the action.

The cleverest is by Philip Saddleton, a valiant attempt to exploit some intrinsic properties of the method. The composition exudes intelligent design, cycling alternately through runs involving different adjacent groups of four bells in an elegant way, using short courses of 6 sixes.

5074 Stedman Cinques
Philip A B Saddleton

1234567890E 1 3 4 6
-----------------------
908E1234567 a
-----------------------
1490E236587 b |
----------------------- |
67E90583412 - - | |
320E9418765 - - | |
8590E761234 - - | |
14E90236587 - - | |
670E9583412 - - | |
3190E248765 - - - |A |
86E90572143 - - - - | |
230E9145678 - - - | |B
5890E674321 - - | |
41E90327856 - - | |
760E9852143 - - | |
2390E145678 - - | |
----------------------- |
57E90861342 - - - - |
140E9238765 - - - - |
8590E763412 - - |
7690E854321 A |
0E912345678 c |
-----------------------
2314567890E 3B
-----------------------
a = 9.12.13.14.15.17.18.20.21 (22)
b = 5.6.10.13.14.15 (20)
c = 1.2.5.6.7.8.12.13.14.15.17.18.21.22 (24) Start from rounds as the last row of a quick six

18 1234; 21 4321; 18 2345; 21 5432; 18 3456; 21 6543; 21 4567; 21 7654; 24 5678; 21 8765; 24 6789; 21 9876; 24 7890; 21 0987; 75 80; Each course is 6 sixes except where shown

Mark Eccleston’s neat composition has the footnote “contains little bell runs in every course”, which seems great until you see that said runs tend to be once a course, of the same type in the same place, achieved with blocks which keep the front six bells fixed. However, I think it would be unfair to parody this as essentially analogous to “traditional” compositions which keep the back bells fixed, though – here the back bells get to rotate through a sequence of pleasant course-ends, also.

5000 Stedman Cinques
Mark Eccleston
(3241658709E)
-----------
3241657E098 s13.s15
3241650E897 2
324165E0987 s2.s10.s13.s15
3241657E980 s2.s13
324165E7890 s10.s13.s15.s22
324165E7089 1
3241657980E 1.2.s13.s15.s22
32416587E90 2.22
3241658790E 12.14.15.16.17.18.19 (20)
3241657809E s2.s10.s13.s15
-----------
325164879E0 2.s6.s10.s13.s15
3251647E098 1.s5.13.14.s15 |
3251640E897 2.s5.s14 |
325164E0987 s2.s5.s10.13.14.s15 |
3251647E980 s2.s5.13.14 | A
325164E7890 s5.s10.13.14.s15.s22 |
325164E7089 1.s5.s14 |
3251647980E 1.2.s5.13.14.s15.s22 |
32516487E90 2.s5.s14.22 |
-----------
315264879E0 s5.9.10.s14
31526487E90 A
-----------
234165879E0 s5.s6.9.10.s14.s16
23416587E90 A
-----------
214365879E0 s5.9.10.s14
-----------
Round with a bob at 1.
Start at backstroke with rounds as the fifth row of a slow six.
First Rung: Birmingham (Cathedral) on 20 Jul 2009

MBD uses what he calls his “Generation Three little-bell block (Q)”. This bespoke block is used once a part to obtain maximum little-bell runs in the same courses as the conventional 78 and 87 “tittums” and 87 handstroke home big-bell positions he uses in his three-part plan.

Each repetition of the Q blocks gives the following run types:
course six runs
3 4
5 2345 back
4 4 6543 back
5
5 4
5 65432 hand
6 4 12345 back
5
7 4
5 12345 hand
8 4 65432 back
5

Mark’s Q-block is clearly well-designed, well-employed, and deserves greater attention.

5007 Stedman Cinques (#1)
Mark B Davies
2314567890E 3 6 7 9 12 14 16 18 19
---------------------------------------
12346578E90 (a)
241365 s - |
432165 s - |
314265 s - |
254163 - s s s | Q
514623 s s s |
523614 s s s s |
263154 s s s |
214365 s s s s - |
---------------------------------------
13246587E90 (b)
341265 s -
423165 s -
21537486 s - - -
12537486 s
12346587 s s s - -
21436587 Q
---------------------------------------
1324658709E (c)
341265 s -
423165 s -
21437586 s s - -
21536487 s s -
125364 s
123465 s s -
214365 Q
---------------------------------------
a = 1 5 8 9 10 11 s13 14 15 (20 sixes)
b = s2 s7 s13 s15 18
c = 2 s7 s15 18
Contains:
23 567890E, 7 near misses, 42 LB5 front & back, 79 LB4 front & back.

Michael Wilby takes a similar approach, using a customised block to generate little-bell runs and applying it to several established back-bell positions. By introducing a few additional turning courses, he also churns out all 10 near misses, and several other notable rows.

5004 Stedman Cinques
Michael P A Wilby
(3241658709E) 1 5 6 7 9 14 16 18 19
--------------------------------------
3241657890E 2.12.14.16.17.18.19 (20 sixes)
3124 1s.10s.18
2134 - s
--------------------------------------
14236578E90 - s - |
532461 - s s |
4352 s s - |
315264 - s s | A
314265 s s s |
325164 s s |
324165 s s s - - |
--------------------------------------
1342658790E 2.7s.9.10.13s.15.16.18s
--------------------------------------
213465E7908 7s.9s.15.16.18
324165 A*
--------------------------------------
2351748690E 3s.6.7.12.15s
123475869E0 1.6.7.9.10.16s.18
2143758609E 1.7s.9s.18
--------------------------------------
21346587E90 2s.3.9s.12.15s.18
324165 A*
--------------------------------------
2134658709E 2.7s.15s.18
324165 A*
--------------------------------------
A* = A, without - at 1

Start at backstroke with rounds as the fifth row of a slow six.
NB the first call (2) is at the first six end of the peal.
Contains all 10 near misses, tittums, and little-bell rollups.
First Rung: Birmingham Cathedral on 14 Mar 2005

==2) “All-in” Stedman Cinques – David Hull – September 2009==
Drawing on Stedman trends over the decade, many of which he instigated, David put together a “turning-course dominated” double-peal of Stedman which is a very significant challenge to call. He successfully shows that a peal can generate lots of musical rows of Stedman, with rapid transitions.

Indeed, this composition beautifully exemplifies recent Stedman cinques compositional trends, as well as simultaneously highlights both the intrinsic strengths, limitations and weaknesses of the method.

10000 Stedman Cinques
1234567890E Sixes
123456E9780 S1.4.5.6.7.9.S12.13.14.15.16.17.18 18
21E90785634 S2.S4.5.6.9.S12.13 16
7890E123456 3.4.S6.9.10 12
7864523E190 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
234567890E1 3.4.6.7.9.10 12
2310E896745 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
5193276E480 2.6.S8.S14.S16 18
5463217890E 1.2.3.5.7.9.10.11.12.16 18
23145678E90 1.7.8.9.10.11.S13.15.16 20
3421 S16.18 |
4132 S16.18 | A
1243 S16.18 |
E1089674523 S2.4.S6.S13.14.17 18
E1352749608 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
1E860492735 6.S8.9.11.13.15 16
1E234567890 4.6.9.11.13 14
1423E098765 3.S5.6.8.S10.11.14.18.20.22.25.27 28
4312 S16.18
3421 S7.S9.18
4357698E021 6.S8.9.11.13.15 16
132540E8967 2.6.9.10.11.S14.15 16
1423E975680 3.4.5.S7.8.12.13.S15.17.18 18
2134 A
213465E7908 1.2.3.4.S5.S7.S9.12.14.15.16 18
3241 A
3152648709E S10.S15.18.19
31527486 3.4.12.S17
32516487 3.4.12.17.18
231465 6.7.S9.18
3421 3.4.S12.16.17.18 |
4132 3.4.S12.16.17.18 | B
1243 3.4.S12.16.17.18 |
21E09876543 6.S8.9.11.13.15 16
E9753124680 S1.S4.5.S8.10 10
879E0123456 S1.3.7.S10 10
786452391E0 5.6.8.S11.12.13.15.16 16
E1902345678 S2.4.6.8.9.10.11.12.13.14 14
E019 18
09E1 S16.18
90E1 S16
908674523E1 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
4567890E123 3.4.6.7.9.10 12
453120E8967 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
0E123456789 3.4.6.7.9.10 12
0E978563412 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
567890E1234 3.4.6.7.9.10 12
1543E276980 S3.4.S6.S9.10.12.S15.18.19.20 20
213546798E0 1.3.4.6.9.11 12
7654321E098 3.4.S7.9.10 12
768091E3254 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
12345E67890 S1.2.3.4.S11.12.13.14 14
43125678E90 1.3.5.10.14.16.17.18 18
1423 A
9785634120E S4.S6.S8.11.12.S14 14
E0981234567 6.7.8.9.11.13.15.16.18.20.23.25 26
674523819E0 2.4.6.8.9.10.11.12.13.14 14
4362850719E 1.2.4.S6.9 10
13E29078564 6.8.10.11.13.15 16
14236587 2.S7.8.S11.S14.15 16
2134 A
4132E098765 S5.6.8.S11.12.14.18.20.22.25.27 28
1243 S16.18
2134 S7.S9.18
12537486E90 S1.5.8.11.12.13.14 16
124375869E0 S10.S19
2134 S7.S9.18
1234 S16
2134658709E 1.3.4.12.16.17
3241 B
0E869472513 S1.2.3.4.6.7.S11.12.13.S15 16
0E351729486 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
089E7654321 4.6.S9.11.13 14
2314657890E S1.S5.S7.9.10.13.S15 16
2314568790E 1.S4.5.S7.8.9.S12.S14.15.16.17.18 18
231465E7908 S1.S4.5.S7.8.9.S11.12.13.14.15.16.17.18 18
1243 A
23517496E80 3.S12.13.S16.18.19.22
Full slow six start.
Rounds in 4 changes.

===3) Stedman Cinques on a “magnificent six” plan – PABS – 2003===
One of a very small number of compositions of cinques to take a different approach, Philip Saddleton here employs the concepts of the “magnificent 6” caters / royal compositions in a 44-part cinques composition.

Stedman clearly lacks advantages of Erin here, at using the plain method to transition between a row and its reverse. The concept is right, the execution here interesting and elegant without being knock-out.

5016 Stedman Cinques by Philip A B Saddleton
(after P J Earis)
2314567890E
-----------
35179E24680 a
9807654321E b
-----------
61E72839405 b
12E34567890 a
-----------
11-part
a = 2s.4.5.7.8.11s.14.16s.20 (20)
b = 1s.4s.6.7.9s.12s.16.18 (18)
Queens; Tittums; Back rounds;

==See Also==
*[[Compositions of the Decade 1 - Introduction]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 2 - Doubles]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 3 - Minor]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 4 - Triples]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 5 - Major]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 6 - Caters]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 7 - Royal]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 9 - Maximus]]
[[Category: Composition Reviews]]

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 8 - Cinques

2009-12-22T17:34:11Z

Pje24:

__NOTOC__
===A Review by Philip Earis - continued===
Cinques feels very claustrophobic at the moment, imprisoned by the irrational and still-increasing proportion of Stedman that is rung at this stage.

===By the numbers===
11-bell peals are up 9% over the decade compared with the 1990s. However, the real story is the method distribution within these peals.

Peals of Stedman Cinques are up 14%, and indeed now account for about 88% of rung 11-bell peals. The Stedman domination of the stage is increasing apace - peals of Grandsire are down 22% in absolute terms, falling to about 10% of rung cinques peals. Throw in a very small smattering of Erin and Plain Bob, and that completes the show. There is nothing else happening at all. No new methods, no spliced, nothing.

The decade has seen considerable compositional effort within the framework of Stedman, to be sure. Peals contain more musical rows, pay more attention to little bells, and are more varied than the simple stodgy compositional fare served up in the past: 6 and two 19s, and all that sort of thing. Cyclic patches, all “near miss” rows, and so on, seem more of a benchmark than an exceptional feature.

This progress is of course welcome, with the caveat that it’s only welcome where complexity genuinely adds value.

===Hitting the wall===
The problem is that the current direction of development gets to the point where ever-greater compositional complexity is needed, with the “reward” of arguably ever diminishing future returns. The whole thing about Stedman is that the coursing order gets disrupted by the method. This admittedly gives the advantage that it’s fairly quick to jump between any two rows – something that PABS’ turning course software and related new tools over the decade such as MBD and David Hull’s online “prickers” have helped to master.

However, the consequent disadvantage of the property that it is quick to jump between any two rows is that music in advanced Stedman compositions tends (needs?) to be all about jumping inelegantly between desired sixes, in a “chase the row” style. Lots of bobs to disrupt the flow, lots of inelegant compositional complexity, and then a fleeting effect when the desired six arrives.

As alluded to, an intrinsic property of Stedman is that it is hard to get big-bell and little-bell runs in the same course. The best Stedman compositions of the decade have tried to overcome this in neat, systematic ways with partial success, as we shall see.

However, the method will always be working against the composer.

===A new direction?===
So what to do? Well, with Stedman I feel the structure of the method naturally leads to some coursing music potential, and there remains further scope for exploiting such effects. Whilst the decade has seen a growing realisation that four consecutive bells coursing does not constitute “tittums”, proper tittums effects – which will of course propagate for more than one six – should still exist.

For example, the following course-ends (amongst many others) should give big bell coursing music around the course-end, with little-bell music around the half course.

2476839105E
2176859403E
6472859103E

However, the real key is for people to broaden their horizons. It’s not even that peals of Stedman are rung because they have a high chance of peal success. “Stedman and score” is not a phrase I’ve heard before.

Following on from the first variable cover peals in the 1990s, the present decade has seen the introduction of spliced cinques and maximus. There is no synergistic effect here. The effect that bolting Stedman onto Bristol gives is much more often parasitic.

Rather, there are unlimited new cinques method possibilities out there, unlimited glorious compositional possibilities unconstrained by falseness. Accepted wisdom is often counter-productive, and there’s no shortage of accepted thought when it comes to Stedman Cinques. More boldness is needed.

==1) Little bell Stedman==
*5074 Stedman Cinques – Philip A B Saddleton
*5000 Stedman Cinques – Mark Eccleston – July 2009
*5007 Stedman Cinques – Mark B Davies – 2003
*5004 Stedman Cinques – Michael P A Wilby – March 2005

These four compositions exemplify some of the compositional progress of the decade, showing how little bells can finally get involved in some of the action.

The cleverest is by Philip Saddleton, a valiant attempt to exploit some intrinsic properties of the method. The composition exudes intelligent design, cycling alternately through runs involving different adjacent groups of four bells in an elegant way, using short courses of 6 sixes.

Mark Eccleston’s neat composition has the footnote “contains little bell runs in every course”, which seems great until you see that said runs tend to be once a course, of the same type in the same place, achieved with blocks which keep the front six bells fixed. However, I think it would be unfair to parody this as essentially analogous to “traditional” compositions which keep the back bells fixed, though – here the back bells get to rotate through a sequence of pleasant course-ends, also.

MBD uses what he calls his “Generation Three little-bell block (Q)”. This bespoke block is used once a part to obtain maximum little-bell runs in the same courses as the conventional 78 and 87 “tittums” and 87 handstroke home big-bell positions he uses in his three-part plan.

Each repetition of the Q blocks gives the following run types:
course six runs
3 4
5 2345 back
4 4 6543 back
5
5 4
5 65432 hand
6 4 12345 back
5
7 4
5 12345 hand
8 4 65432 back
5

Mark’s Q-block is clearly well-designed, well-employed, and deserves greater attention.

Michael Wilby takes a similar approach, using a customised block to generate little-bell runs and applying it to several established back-bell positions. By introducing a few additional turning courses, he also churns out all 10 near misses, and several other notable rows.

5074 Stedman Cinques
Philip A B Saddleton

1234567890E 1 3 4 6
-----------------------
908E1234567 a
-----------------------
1490E236587 b |
----------------------- |
67E90583412 - - | |
320E9418765 - - | |
8590E761234 - - | |
14E90236587 - - | |
670E9583412 - - | |
3190E248765 - - - |A |
86E90572143 - - - - | |
230E9145678 - - - | |B
5890E674321 - - | |
41E90327856 - - | |
760E9852143 - - | |
2390E145678 - - | |
----------------------- |
57E90861342 - - - - |
140E9238765 - - - - |
8590E763412 - - |
7690E854321 A |
0E912345678 c |
-----------------------
2314567890E 3B
-----------------------
a = 9.12.13.14.15.17.18.20.21 (22)
b = 5.6.10.13.14.15 (20)
c = 1.2.5.6.7.8.12.13.14.15.17.18.21.22 (24) Start from rounds as the last row of a quick six

18 1234; 21 4321; 18 2345; 21 5432; 18 3456; 21 6543; 21 4567; 21 7654; 24 5678; 21 8765; 24 6789; 21 9876; 24 7890; 21 0987; 75 80; Each course is 6 sixes except where shown

5000 Stedman Cinques
Mark Eccleston
(3241658709E)
-----------
3241657E098 s13.s15
3241650E897 2
324165E0987 s2.s10.s13.s15
3241657E980 s2.s13
324165E7890 s10.s13.s15.s22
324165E7089 1
3241657980E 1.2.s13.s15.s22
32416587E90 2.22
3241658790E 12.14.15.16.17.18.19 (20)
3241657809E s2.s10.s13.s15
-----------
325164879E0 2.s6.s10.s13.s15
3251647E098 1.s5.13.14.s15 |
3251640E897 2.s5.s14 |
325164E0987 s2.s5.s10.13.14.s15 |
3251647E980 s2.s5.13.14 | A
325164E7890 s5.s10.13.14.s15.s22 |
325164E7089 1.s5.s14 |
3251647980E 1.2.s5.13.14.s15.s22 |
32516487E90 2.s5.s14.22 |
-----------
315264879E0 s5.9.10.s14
31526487E90 A
-----------
234165879E0 s5.s6.9.10.s14.s16
23416587E90 A
-----------
214365879E0 s5.9.10.s14
-----------
Round with a bob at 1.
Start at backstroke with rounds as the fifth row of a slow six.
First Rung: Birmingham (Cathedral) on 20 Jul 2009

5007 Stedman Cinques (#1)
Mark B Davies
2314567890E 3 6 7 9 12 14 16 18 19
---------------------------------------
12346578E90 (a)
241365 s - |
432165 s - |
314265 s - |
254163 - s s s | Q
514623 s s s |
523614 s s s s |
263154 s s s |
214365 s s s s - |
---------------------------------------
13246587E90 (b)
341265 s -
423165 s -
21537486 s - - -
12537486 s
12346587 s s s - -
21436587 Q
---------------------------------------
1324658709E (c)
341265 s -
423165 s -
21437586 s s - -
21536487 s s -
125364 s
123465 s s -
214365 Q
---------------------------------------
a = 1 5 8 9 10 11 s13 14 15 (20 sixes)
b = s2 s7 s13 s15 18
c = 2 s7 s15 18
Contains:
23 567890E, 7 near misses, 42 LB5 front & back, 79 LB4 front & back.

5004 Stedman Cinques
Michael P A Wilby
(3241658709E) 1 5 6 7 9 14 16 18 19
--------------------------------------
3241657890E 2.12.14.16.17.18.19 (20 sixes)
3124 1s.10s.18
2134 - s
--------------------------------------
14236578E90 - s - |
532461 - s s |
4352 s s - |
315264 - s s | A
314265 s s s |
325164 s s |
324165 s s s - - |
--------------------------------------
1342658790E 2.7s.9.10.13s.15.16.18s
--------------------------------------
213465E7908 7s.9s.15.16.18
324165 A*
--------------------------------------
2351748690E 3s.6.7.12.15s
123475869E0 1.6.7.9.10.16s.18
2143758609E 1.7s.9s.18
--------------------------------------
21346587E90 2s.3.9s.12.15s.18
324165 A*
--------------------------------------
2134658709E 2.7s.15s.18
324165 A*
--------------------------------------
A* = A, without - at 1

Start at backstroke with rounds as the fifth row of a slow six.
NB the first call (2) is at the first six end of the peal.
Contains all 10 near misses, tittums, and little-bell rollups.
First Rung: Birmingham Cathedral on 14 Mar 2005

==2) “All-in” Stedman Cinques – David Hull – September 2009==
Drawing on Stedman trends over the decade, many of which he instigated, David put together a “turning-course dominated” double-peal of Stedman which is a very significant challenge to call. He successfully shows that a peal can generate lots of musical rows of Stedman, with rapid transitions.

Indeed, this composition beautifully exemplifies recent Stedman cinques compositional trends, as well as simultaneously highlights both the intrinsic strengths, limitations and weaknesses of the method.

10000 Stedman Cinques
1234567890E Sixes
123456E9780 S1.4.5.6.7.9.S12.13.14.15.16.17.18 18
21E90785634 S2.S4.5.6.9.S12.13 16
7890E123456 3.4.S6.9.10 12
7864523E190 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
234567890E1 3.4.6.7.9.10 12
2310E896745 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
5193276E480 2.6.S8.S14.S16 18
5463217890E 1.2.3.5.7.9.10.11.12.16 18
23145678E90 1.7.8.9.10.11.S13.15.16 20
3421 S16.18 |
4132 S16.18 | A
1243 S16.18 |
E1089674523 S2.4.S6.S13.14.17 18
E1352749608 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
1E860492735 6.S8.9.11.13.15 16
1E234567890 4.6.9.11.13 14
1423E098765 3.S5.6.8.S10.11.14.18.20.22.25.27 28
4312 S16.18
3421 S7.S9.18
4357698E021 6.S8.9.11.13.15 16
132540E8967 2.6.9.10.11.S14.15 16
1423E975680 3.4.5.S7.8.12.13.S15.17.18 18
2134 A
213465E7908 1.2.3.4.S5.S7.S9.12.14.15.16 18
3241 A
3152648709E S10.S15.18.19
31527486 3.4.12.S17
32516487 3.4.12.17.18
231465 6.7.S9.18
3421 3.4.S12.16.17.18 |
4132 3.4.S12.16.17.18 | B
1243 3.4.S12.16.17.18 |
21E09876543 6.S8.9.11.13.15 16
E9753124680 S1.S4.5.S8.10 10
879E0123456 S1.3.7.S10 10
786452391E0 5.6.8.S11.12.13.15.16 16
E1902345678 S2.4.6.8.9.10.11.12.13.14 14
E019 18
09E1 S16.18
90E1 S16
908674523E1 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
4567890E123 3.4.6.7.9.10 12
453120E8967 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
0E123456789 3.4.6.7.9.10 12
0E978563412 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
567890E1234 3.4.6.7.9.10 12
1543E276980 S3.4.S6.S9.10.12.S15.18.19.20 20
213546798E0 1.3.4.6.9.11 12
7654321E098 3.4.S7.9.10 12
768091E3254 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
12345E67890 S1.2.3.4.S11.12.13.14 14
43125678E90 1.3.5.10.14.16.17.18 18
1423 A
9785634120E S4.S6.S8.11.12.S14 14
E0981234567 6.7.8.9.11.13.15.16.18.20.23.25 26
674523819E0 2.4.6.8.9.10.11.12.13.14 14
4362850719E 1.2.4.S6.9 10
13E29078564 6.8.10.11.13.15 16
14236587 2.S7.8.S11.S14.15 16
2134 A
4132E098765 S5.6.8.S11.12.14.18.20.22.25.27 28
1243 S16.18
2134 S7.S9.18
12537486E90 S1.5.8.11.12.13.14 16
124375869E0 S10.S19
2134 S7.S9.18
1234 S16
2134658709E 1.3.4.12.16.17
3241 B
0E869472513 S1.2.3.4.6.7.S11.12.13.S15 16
0E351729486 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
089E7654321 4.6.S9.11.13 14
2314657890E S1.S5.S7.9.10.13.S15 16
2314568790E 1.S4.5.S7.8.9.S12.S14.15.16.17.18 18
231465E7908 S1.S4.5.S7.8.9.S11.12.13.14.15.16.17.18 18
1243 A
23517496E80 3.S12.13.S16.18.19.22
Full slow six start.
Rounds in 4 changes.

===3) Stedman Cinques on a “magnificent six” plan – PABS – 2003===
One of a very small number of compositions of cinques to take a different approach, Philip Saddleton here employs the concepts of the “magnificent 6” caters / royal compositions in a 44-part cinques composition.

Stedman clearly lacks advantages of Erin here, at using the plain method to transition between a row and its reverse. The concept is right, the execution here interesting and elegant without being knock-out.

5016 Stedman Cinques by Philip A B Saddleton
(after P J Earis)
2314567890E
-----------
35179E24680 a
9807654321E b
-----------
61E72839405 b
12E34567890 a
-----------
11-part
a = 2s.4.5.7.8.11s.14.16s.20 (20)
b = 1s.4s.6.7.9s.12s.16.18 (18)
Queens; Tittums; Back rounds;

==See Also==
*[[Compositions of the Decade 1 - Introduction]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 2 - Doubles]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 3 - Minor]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 4 - Triples]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 5 - Major]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 6 - Caters]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 7 - Royal]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 9 - Maximus]]
[[Category: Composition Reviews]]

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 7 - Royal

2009-12-22T17:33:56Z

Pje24:

__NOTOC__
===A Review by Philip Earis - continued===
Royal ringing has greatly improved over the decade, becoming much sharper and more focused. Progress has occurred across the board, with a shift to better established methods, the appearance of some cracking and daring new methods, and a trend towards smarter and neater “runny” compositions, without fear of conventional dogmas.

These trends have been further extrapolated with the widespread development of both cyclic compositions, along with some great new cyclic methods also. Furthermore, as we shall see other very new types of compositions have also established a foothold.

===Established Methods===
Turning first to single-method peals in established methods, the decade has enjoyed a marked transition towards better methods with more musical potential.

Ten-bell peal numbers overall seem to show a sustained rise compared with the 1990s. Peals of Yorkshire royal are up 25%.

However, the biggest trend by far has been the stratospheric rise in Bristol. There have been 718 peals of Bristol Royal published so far since the beginning of the year 2000, a massive 120% rise on the 326 from the 1990s. Peal bands around the country, perhaps especially in the North West, have been attracted to the beautiful elegance and music potential of the method, and their thirst for the nectar of musical compositions has been a force for progress.

Happily, there has also been a reduction in some of the nastier elements of 10-bell ringing. Peals of Rutland are down 37%, Pudsey down 43%, and spliced in 8 methods (which on ten almost invariably means one thing) down 24%.

===New methods – “regular”===
It has been a great decade for new royal methods. Triton Delight - quite simply London Royal with music off the front - was first pealed in May 1999, and there have subsequently been over 60 repeat performances. Whilst this is an indicator of progress, it is sadly a sign of some conductors’ intransigence that there have still been an order of magnitude more peals of London. This gap will surely be further eroded in the years ahead.

The two other great royal methods of the 1990s – Normanby Surprise, and Brave New World – set the scene for the developments of the 2000s. Neither stuck to tired and pointless limiting conventions – Normanby is a super double mx method with 3 consecutive blows, whilst Brave New World eschewed both conventional symmetry and plain bob leadheads to launch a cyclic odyssey.

The new methods of the present decade have continued and developed these trends, to impressive effect. Mark Davies has led the charge with “regular” (ie plain bob leadhead), coursing-dominated methods, including:

Black Pearl: &-5-4.5-2.3.2-9.8.9-6.7-6-1,1
Snow Tiger: &3-5.4-5-3.2-9.8-6-7.6-8.9,2
Raspberry Crumble: &3-5.4-5-3-2-8-56.4.3.2-8.9,2
Jennie’s Endeavour: &3-5.4-5-3-3478-58-6-7.6-8.9,2

Whilst there is little point in breaking conventions just for the sake of it, there is even less point in conventions existing just for the sake of it. It is good to see innovative examples of methods with 9ths in the notation above the treble, for just about the first time. These allow, inter alia, elegant double methods like Snow Tiger.

Incidentally, whilst I think I first published the figures for double method Snow Tiger (Royal), Mark claims an independent earlier discovery, and links it with his eponymous delight maximus method. The method is certainly good enough to fight over.

===New methods – cyclic glory===

In parallel to the above, the early years of the decade saw the arrival of a string of cyclic methods – ie methods with leadheads that are rotations of rounds. Cyclic methods cannot have conventional palindromic symmetry (at least not if started at the symmetry point). However, other symmetries can be used. The super new major method Anglia Cyclic (+-1-2367-1-7-5-36-4-2) employed rotational symmetry, but here on ten bells two new method stand out:

[http://ringing.org/main/pages/blueline?title=Double+Resurrection+Cyclic+Bob+Royal Double Resurrection (+-678-67-1-7-9-345-45-1-4-2)]
Spinning Jennie (&56.3-4.5.2-1-34-5.36.4-1.56.8.56.1,1)

The very simple right-place plain method Double Resurrection uses glide symmetry to great effect, whilst MBD’s Spinning Jennie cleverly is conventionally double (building on a Philip Saddleton idea), nominally with irregular leadheads, but is started at the treble snap to magically produce a clever cyclic method.

These both offer an incredibly concentrated musical experience and are really pleasurable to ring. If there’s one thing you take home from this whole series of articles, it should be to try ringing some cyclic royal.

===Composition trends===
The vast majority of royal peals rung continue to be in regular (ie plain bob leadhead) methods. And the compositions for these – both in what has been produced and in what is frequently rung - have both leapt forward over the decade.

Continuing a previous trend, little-bell runs have been very much at the fore – the progress is such that any new royal composition citing a “CRU” count would be laughed out of court. Compositional footnotes like “All courses contain little-bell music” have not only appeared, but become much more common - yardsticks, even.

Indeed, the trend towards runs has been extrapolated to cyclic compositions also - both pure cyclic 9- and 10-parts, and compositions including cyclic transitions, have featured prominently.

Cyclic compositions are especially attractive – and have become almost the default – in spliced, offering an easy yet potentially really musical way to achieve all-the-work for all the method. Indeed, the decade has seen the emergence of the first adventurous “bespoke” peals of spliced royal, with the methods customised to maximise the composition’s music, as we shall see.

Bespoke compositions have also taken off in single method peals, especially Bristol Royal. David Hull has led the way here – the method’s flexibility allows different tastes to be catered for. The trend has continued to other, less compliant methods – Graham Bradshaw has done some good work trying to squeeze music from Cambridge, for example (I haven’t selected these below, but see www.ringing.org for examples).

Clever tricks have also improved straight 14-course tenors-together compositions in single methods. Two-parts with just calls at M, W and H are very common, and many people might have thought all possibilities had been exhausted by the end of the 1990s. However, such 2-part compositions have expanded beyond just straight 1243657890 partend changes, with some interesting developments with 1654327890 partends.

Just like with major, a mixture of pencil-and-paper logic and the raw power of the SMC32 software have meant that many better royal compositions have been produced.

As an aside, I have no qualms about using the word “better” – with orchestral music, it’s very subjective and not meaningful to compare Mahler and Handel with a view to ranking them. However, change ringing’s constraints and formalisms mean that any effect (and hence any set of compositions) can be quantised in a systematic way. The only input is choosing a suitable metric to compare. Over the decade different composers’ metrics have started to converge, I feel, and whilst complete convergence is unrealistic (and arguably undesirable), there is still some way to go to avoid people talking across each other.

Moreover, royal compositions have seen much acceptance and uptake of less conventional calls, when used to good effect. Calls at 7ths, and indeed different bobs such as 16, 18, 123456 have all appeared, and also led to improvements in simple 2-part compositions.

Using multiple types of calls can be an elegant way to get all consecutive bells coursing, and other new types of compositions based on this “mega tittums” plan have made their first appearance. 10 bells are just about enough for the effect to be pronounced and effective.

===Summary===
Like standing on high ground and admiring the vista behind after a long walk, it’s an exhilarating time to survey the progress in 10-bell ringing. The march towards even higher ground needs to continue. Let’s just hope that the broader body of ringers catch up with the advances, and these are better reflected in what is actually frequently rung.

==1) Further improvements in two-part tenors-together compositions==

* Triton Delight – David Hull et al – 2003
* Yorkshire Surprise – Mark Davies - 2004

I’ve selected David’s Triton as the lead typical example of how simple tenors-together compositions have got better in recent decades. The grounds for inclusion could be questioned here – the composition is an improved tweak from Don Morrison based on the 1990s Hull little-bell classic “the fluke”, whilst the method has similarities to London (the overwork and leadhead group), but with substantially more music under the treble. Overall, though, I feel this shows what can be simply achieved which in the past simply was not achieved:

5040 Triton Delight
23456 M W H
42356 -
65324 - - -
43526 - -
25634 - -
34562 - s s
56342 - -
24365 - - -
Repeat

Touch contains:
Odd Even Total
xxxx567890 = 0 + 14 = 14
xxxx657890 = 0 + 14 = 14
xxxxxx2345 = 12 + 12 = 24
xxxxxx5432 = 12 + 12 = 24
xxxxxx3456 = 24 + 24 = 48
xxxxxx6543 = 24 + 24 = 48
0987xxxxxx = 70 + 0 = 70
7890xxxxxx = 42 + 0 = 42
2345xxxxxx = 8 + 8 = 16
5432xxxxxx = 6 + 6 = 12
3456xxxxxx = 14 + 14 = 28
6543xxxxxx = 14 + 14 = 28

MBD also claims a re-arrangement, changing two pairs of bobs for singles, but without extra musical gain. He’s on less shaky ground when he turns to Yorkshire. The composition below contains a great spread of little-bell music, both in variety of runs and in its distribution in the composition. The finish is especially nice, going from 24653 to 53246 in the last course of the peal.

In Mark’s words,

''“This is my absolute favourite conventional two-part… 3.5 courses of the last part are in LB5 coursing orders. I think it's absolutely fascinating that such a result is possible from a two-part structure: a very simple structure, too, that really just boils down to 2W 2H repeated, padded. To ring, it's possibly even better than the best one-part -very-nearly-almost as much music, plus all the fun of watching the second part unfold knowing what the first has foretold. Magic”. ''

Indeed.

5040 Yorkshire (No.1)
23456 M W H
---------------
24356 s
53462 s 2 2
46325 s s -
53624 - -
24365 - s s
---------------
2 part

Contains:
13 567890
13 657890
53 LB5
104 3456/6543
60 2345/5432
10 4567/7654

==2) Cyclic method compositions==

* Double Resurrection Cyclic Bob – Andrew Tibbetts – 2003
* Spinning Jennie Delight – David Pipe - 2003

As described above, Double Resurrection is a fantastic yet simple right-place plain cyclic method. It has an efficient structure and glide symmetry, leading to reverse runs round every half-lead, and forward runs round every leadhead.

The composition below is the first to combine the excellent “magnificent 6” rounds -> queens transition on 10 bells with the benefit of a cyclic method to fully exploit the effect. And the effect is truly mesmerising. I find it hard to fully describe its joys to those who haven’t experienced it.

1234567890 (rounds)
----------
1357924680 (queens)
1594837260 (reverse tittums)
1987654320 (reverse rounds)
1864297530 (reverse queens)
1627384950 (tittums)
1234567890 (rounds)

The plain nature of the method means that varied music appears very frequently, in a continuous “music box” demonstration. This, coupled with the rapid forward / reverse nature of the music, further magnify the effect. Both the tittums and queens block cycles (and their reverses) sound much more appealing than you might naively expect.

(Of course, when the composition is in the “reverse rounds” section, the forward runs appear around the half-lead)

The remainder of the composition consists of singled-in courses to provide a joyful variation on the theme. It’s awesome.

5040 Double Resurrection (#6)
5 6 7 8 9 234567890
ss ss s ss 324
s s 243
(a) 357924680
ss s 375
(a) 594837260
s 549
(a) 987654320
6 ss s 978
(a) 864297530
ss s 846
(a) 627384950
s 672
(b) 432567890
s 423
s s 234567890

(a)=2,s3,s5,7,8,9,s12 (12 leads)

Of course, the “magnificent six” transition can also be captured in a composition using methods with plain bob leadheads. The four-lead block 1,2,4 has been used in a number of David Hull Bristol Royal compositions to achieve this effect (more on this later), and can be extrapolated to a whole peal composition. Rob Lee put together the following:

5220 Double Coslany/10440 Bristol:

234567890
---------------------
1, 2, 4 864297530
1, 2, 4 594837260
4 602374859
2, 3, 4 972640853
2, 3, 4 342907856
s1, s8, 9 345678902
---------------------
9 part. Contains the 54 cycles of rounds, queens & tittums and reverses thereof.

This exploits the regular nature of the method, using half the plain course to join up the reverse tittums/tittums and reverse rounds/rounds positions. As Rob explains,

''“…Doing this means that some of the part ends occur at handstroke instead of backstroke, and so the 1,2,4 block is used in reverse when this is the case. Unfortunately, the cyclic part end obtained is 567890234 which means rounds occurs after 3 parts. A bit of fiddling around solves this, but at the expense of a bit of symmetry/music”''

Going back to cyclic methods, a further example of what can be achieved is with the treble-dodging method Spinning Jennie. The method is conventionally double with the following notation:

&56.3-4.5.2-1-34-5.36.4-1.56.8.56.1, 1 = 1485309627

However, ringing this starting away from the symmetry point brings up the cyclic method:

+x4.5.2x1x34x5.36.4x1.56.8.56.1.56.8.56.1x4.36.5x34x1x2.5.4x3.56.1.56.3 = 1345678902

The music isn’t as concentrated or dare I say pronounced as Resurrection, but still allows some very interesting effects. David Pipe put together the following composition, designed to bring out the runs given by the method.

5000 Spinning Jennie Delight Royal
1234567890
-------------------------------------
1543267890 s4.s4½
1452367890 3.4
1325476980 s4.s4½.s7.s9
1325476809 9
1234568709 3.4.7
1345627890 s1.3.5.s8
1436578902 3.4.7.9
1243658709 7.8 (8 leads)
1243658079 s9
1243650987 s½.8.9
1234569078 4.5.8.9
1234560987 8.9
1325460897 3.4.s9
1234567890 s½.3.4
-------------------------------------
Backstroke-snap start and finish.

Bob = 38, Single = 389 both made at the backstroke-snap.
Half-lead single = 89

There remains an opportunity for a magnificent 6 style composition here, I feel.

==3) Bespoke cyclic royal compositions – David Pipe – April 2003 / October 2003==

David Pipe’s 9-part and 10-part spliced royal compositions are a sort of contraction of his classic maximus compositions on a similar plan.

The methods in the royal peals – named after James Bond villains – are all custom-designed to yield a feast of music in the leads they appear in the composition. The new methods used, such as Goldfinger, are also intrinsically very attractive.

A link method is used to move the bells between the cyclic parts. The main block of the composition has the 2nd and the tenor of that cyclic part (so in the 9-part composition, bells 5 and 6 in the first part) alternately ringing “pivot leads”, ie the leads where they are the pivot bell.

Pivot leads are almost invariably the most musical in a method, and this structure yields a great way to ring as many plain leads in the part as possible, benefitting from an elegant palindromic structure which leads to a great balance of forward and reverse runs in each part.

Unlike maximus, a cyclic royal composition of primarily treble-dodging (single-dodging) methods needs to contain more than just the plain leads from each cyclic part to take the length over 5000 changes. In the Pipe compositions, the “padding” is based on two blocks of three bobs.

“Padding” is an unfair word as these sections are also very well-chosen, though. Custom-designed methods are again used for the best effect – for example, Kananga, which yields limited music off the front in the plain course, but much more in the 243 course in which it actually appears in the composition.

All in all, two finely crafted examples. (David Hull also has a similar, later composition containing methods with “opposite” pivot bells)

5022 Spliced Royal (8m)
234567890 Oddjob Little Alliance
-453028967 Ourumov Surprise
342590786 Zorin Surprise
-345028967 Kananga Surprise
-534028967 Scaramanga Alliance
452390786 Goldfinger Surprise
305846279 Dr No Differential Surprise
249573608 Blofeld Alliance
083657492 Blofeld Alliance
927465830 Dr No Differential Surprise
860739524 Goldfinger Surprise
796284053 Scaramanga Alliance
-867902345 Kananga Surprise
-786902345 Zorin Surprise
897264053 Ourumov Surprise
-678902345
9 part

720 each Dr No Differential S., Goldfinger S., Kananaga S.,
Ouromov S., Zorin S.; 648 each Blofeld A., Scaramanga A.;
126 Oddjob Little A.; 125 changes of method, all the work

5000 Spliced Royal (8m)
8901234567 Nick Nack
-------------------------------------
-1908674523 Largo Alliance
1897056342 Zorin Surprise
-1890674523 Kananga Surprise
-1089674523 Scaramanga Alliance
1907856342 Drax Little Alliance
1860492735 Dr No Differential
1795038264 Jaws Little Alliance
1648203957 Jaws Little Alliance
1573920486 Dr No Differential
1426385079 Drax Little Alliance
1352749608 Scaramanga Alliance
-1423567890 Kananga Surprise
-1342567890 Zorin Surprise
1453729608 Largo Alliance
-1234567890
-------------------------------------
10 part

800 Dr No Differential S, Kananga S, Zorin S; 640 Largo A; 600 Jaws Little A; 560 Drax Little A, Elektra A; 240 Nick Nack Differential Little Hybrid; 139 changes of method, All the work for all 10 bells

24 each 123456, 234567, 345678, 456789, 567890 at the back

In a related field, the late John Leary put together a series of 30 spliced royal methods in a cyclic 9-part construction. Whilst this doesn’t have the same bespoke qualities of the Pipe compositions (for example lacking a pivot-lead structure in the plain course), it contains many interesting methods and neat leads.

The composition is simply four bobs at Before to bring up the cyclic part-end 1902345678. The methods are well-structured, with some very nice new methods created for the peal (see for example Bramall Lane, b& 3-56.4-56-6-4-5.4.56.4.5-56-1, 2).

The composition was first rung (in shortened form) in 2007, and forms the basis for longer lengths of royal to be attempted shortly – sadly John isn’t around to complete his good work. The effort to expand the composition has involved some additions from David Hull and some very recent distributed further progress. Watch this space…

234567890
573920486 Beginning
648203957 Kenilworth Road
089674523 Loftus Road
860492735 Bristol
907856342 Stinking Bishop
795038264 Nideggen
426385079 Otterbourne
352749608 Bramall Lane
- 908674523 Savernake
897056342 Kegworth
069482735 Fereneze
640293857 Gresty Road
234567089 Burnden Park
352748690 Allington
573829406 St Neots
- 906482735 Burnley
698074523 Jugsholme
867950342 Kananga
785639204 Lufkin
420395678 Thimbleby
352748069 Essex
234507986 Clifton
- 904263857 Quixwood
573826049 Craven Cottage
785634290 Kings Norton
867459302 Southampton University
496082735 Goldfinger
352708964 City Ground
230597486 Stratford upon Avon
- 902345678 Elgin

===4) Further improvements in two-part tenors-together compositions – 1654327890 partends===

* Yorkshire Surprise – Mark Davies - 2002
* Yorkshire Surprise – David Pipe – 2009
* Bristol Surprise – John Warboys – c2006

Whilst many previous examples of two-part compositions involved the partend 1243657890, the decade saw the emergence of some interesting examples with a partend 1654327890.

This framework is elegant, with the clear attraction that wherever a run involving bells 2,3,4,5,6 appears in the first half of the composition, a corresponding reverse run will delight in the second half.

[This effect isn’t guaranteed in 2-parts with a 124365 partend – see for example the 2nd part of Chris Poole’s 5080 #2 (MIVMHHMW)

Mark Davies created some 2-parts of Yorkshire on this new plan in 2002, though waited 7 years before publishing (after a very tidy new DJP composition on this theme was published);

5040 Yorkshire Surprise Royal (DJP)
M W H 23456
- 2 24536
2 3 43526
- X 65432
2-part
X=16

5040 Yorkshire Surprise Royal, arr MBD (SMC32)
No.1 (local scope)
23456 M W B H
24536 - 2
53624 - x
46325 - -
24365 -
53462 - -
65432 -
2 part, x = 16

5040 Yorkshire Surprise Royal, arr MBD (SMC32)
No.2 (local scope)
M W H 23456
- - 64352
2 2 53462
s s 24365
s 23465
s - 65432
2 part

John Warboys, Don Morrison and other have also explored this effect. A simple example by John is his Bristol Royal:

5040 Bristol S. Royal
23456 V O I
35426 -
32546 2 -
46325 - 2
43652 x
65432 - -
2-part. x = 167890.
All courses contain little-bell music.

===5) Bespoke single-method compositions of Bristol Royal – David Hull – various===

Also:
* Bristol / Triton / Yorkshire – Chris Poole
* Eg Jennie’s Endeavour – Mark Davies

There are different schools of thought about Bristol Royal peal compositions. Neat tenors-together peals, especially two-parts, are well-suited to 8ths place calls. (John Warboys’ example above being just one example).

Indeed, Mark Davies goes so far to stated on his website that,

''“From a musical perspective, Bristol Royal is better with 8th's place bobs; with an average of only just over one call per course possible with 4th's place bobs, the linking possibilities are very slim, making it very hard to stay in good courses and avoid the bad. 4th's place calls are also bad news for those who like their course-end rollups”''

I feel this is too much of a generalisation. As mentioned in the introduction, Bristol Royal ringing and compositions have undergone a renaissance in the past decade. Much of this has been down to bespoke compositions, many by David Hull.

David’s use of the four-lead block 1,2,4 to achieve the magnificent six transition has already been mentioned. Similar motifs, such as the six-lead block S2.S4.S6 to act as a cyclic shunt (whilst going from forward to reverse runs) are also very well employed in his compositions.

An example well-rounded composition illustrative of the progress is:

5002 Bristol Surprise Royal (no.10)
234567890 Leads
243 SH
56342 SM.W
7654382 7ths.Out
902345678 1.3 3
987654320 7.13 21
357924680 1.2.4 4
627384950 1.2.4 4
987654230 S1.2.4 4
432567890 3.9.11 11
423 SH
(53624) M.W
24365 M.SW.SH
(42536) W.M.SW

First rung at Northallerton, 21 July 2007

It should be mentioned that various other composers have played with neat transition blocks as well. For example, Chris Poole has various nice compositions here – in Bristol he uses 7 & 8 lead courses called (3, 4½) and (2½, 4) for a cyclic shift (alternating the stroke of runs also), whilst analogous 8 & 9 lead blocks in Triton called (1, 3) also lead to notable compositions:

5160 Triton Delight Royal
234567890
----------------------------
354769820 1 3 (8)
456789023 1 3 (9)
576982043 1 3 (8)
678902345 1 3 (9)
798204365 1 3 (8)
890234567 1 3 (9)
920436587 1 3 (8)
023456789 1 3 (9)
243657089 1 4 (8)
243659078 5 (9)
243657890 4 5 (9)
34625 1 3 5 8 (8)
64523 1 (9)
35426 1 9 (9)
23456 8 (9)

As a related example, Chris has also exploited the simple effect of calling pairs of bobs on a series of bells to achieve a nice simple Yorkshire composition from 2001:

5162 Yorkshire Surprise Royal (No. 2)
234567890
--------------------------
902345678 2,10,11,19 (23)
789023456 2,10,11,19 (23)
543209876 2,10 (16)
765432098 2,10,11,19 (23)
987654320 2,10,11,19 (23)
524367890 2,10,12 (16)
(324) s5
Call paired bobs on 10-6, 6-10 followed by W sW.

Finally in this section I feel it’s appropriate to highlight an example of a bespoke composition in a great new method. I’ve selected this composition of the previously-mentioned Jennie's Endeavour Surprise Royal – both the method and composition are by Mark Davies.

The method is f-group royal with a feature that appeared a number of times in new methods over the decade: regular handstroke half-leads (so backrounds appears in the plain course at handstroke).

The consequence of this is that calls at the half-lead have the opposite effect to leadend calls. In MBD’s words,

''“This means rapid and unexpected jumps from one position to another can be carried out, and without having to trawl through undesirable leads. Part of the goal of this peal was to provide something really exciting and unpredictable, so the band never knows what is going to come up next”''

The composition makes good use of this property, utilising four types of calls to pack in a varied heap of music. The method is coursing-dominated, and to exploit this the composition also contains sections of what MBD slightly ambitiously calls “tittums” (here four consecutive bells coursing). Again, to quote the loquacious MBD,

''“Coursing orders are often revisited unexpectedly, and the same backbell positions are brought up in different ways. Both the front bells and the back bells are turned around on average more than once a course, but despite the dynamic movement the little bells remain throughout the peal in coursing orders which provide runs of varying kinds”''

5000 Jennie's Endeavour Surprise Royal
234567890
---------
65432 1 8 9 (MWH)
62345 3½ 4½ 5½ 8
43526 1 8 (MW)
435267089 4
243657890 3½ X 7½
325460987 s3½ s4 s5 s5½ 8 9
674523890 3½ s4 4½ s5 5½ 7
634527089 4 s7
234569078 s1 5
354269870 3 3½ 4½ s7½ 9
645237890 ½ s4 4½ 5½ 8½
645239078 4 5
632547890 ½ 3½ 4½ 5½ 8 8½
23456 1 (M)
---------

4th's place calls at lead end, with:
½ = half-lead bob, pn 70
s½ = half-lead single, pn 7890
X = big bob before (pn 16, lead 4)

Contains:
Entire plain course
7 567890
5 657890
9 098765 off the front
193 LB4
113 LB5
46 xxxxxx0987/7890xxxxxx
7 xxxxx09876/67890xxxxx
38 leads in the Tittums
...and various other goodies.

===6) Mega-tittums on 10 – David Pipe and Philip Earis – 2006 onwards===
Following on from the previous composition, a much more complete tittums effect can be achieved if every consecutive bell is coursing. And whilst there had already been a trend in recent years of compositions using more tittums-style coursing orders, such as (7)65432, the “mega tittums” effect of all consecutive bells coursing was really exploited for the first time in the decade.

To easily get the bells in the mega-tittums order from the plain course, a sequence of bobs of different sizes can be used in the same carefully selected calling position (for example in royal, 8ths, 6ths and 4ths place bobs when the tenor runs out).

In a more conventional tenors-together framework, a lone 4ths place call will go into mega-tittums from coursing order 65432. The tenors-together composition below, predominantly with 8ths place bobs, illustrates things nicely.

5000 Bristol S Royal (DJP)
----------------------
V O I H 23456
- 34256
- - 45362
-* 453627089
3 - - 563427890
- - 34562
- - 46325
- - 64523
2 3 - 42356
- 23456
---------------------
* 4ths place call

The more bells there are, and the more coursing-dominated the chosen method is, the more incredible the mega-tittums effect. We’ll have to wait for 12 bells and higher stages before manifestations of the full glory of mega-tittums though…

===7) Spliced Surprise (9-14m), tenors together, atw – Richard Pearce – Summer 2001===
The decade has also seen clever arrangements of more “old school” one-part spliced royal, keeping the tenors together whilst preserving the all-the-work property.

Building on work of Roddy Horton and Graham John, Richard Pearce has created a series of tenors-together spliced in 9-14 methods on this plan.

As explained in the comprehensive ringing-theory message of December 2006 (http://www.bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2006-December/001666.html), the composition is based on sets of courses with the bells in 2nds, 5ths and 6ths rotated. This allows some familiar methods to be included, along with a change of method every lead and a fairly even method distribution.

5160 (14 methods)
23456 M W H
53462 s s R/LEGL/YSRYSRY
63452 s SR/EGLE
53426 s s G/Y/L
42365 s s - EGLE/S/G/
52364 s AKIAKIAK/DC
62354 s ND/IAKIAKIA
(52364) s K/
34265 s - CNDCN/I/
23465 - BPBPBP/
63425 s LEGLEGLE/R
42356 s s - YSRYSRY/GLEG/SRYSRYS/
(52346) s DC/
62345 s AKIAKIA/ND
52346 s CNDCNDC/K
34256 s - I/NDCNDCN/
64253 s R/B
(54236) s s PBPBP/C/
23456 s - BPBPBP/L/
400 each Cambridge, London No 3, Rutland; 360 each Anglia, Bristol, Eardleigh, Irvine, Kegworth (G), Kinross, Lincolnshire (N), Nideggen (D), Pudsey, Superlative No 2, Yorkshire; 128 com, atw.

==See Also==
*[[Compositions of the Decade 1 - Introduction]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 2 - Doubles]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 3 - Minor]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 4 - Triples]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 5 - Major]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 6 - Caters]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 8 - Cinques]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 9 - Maximus]]
[[Category: Composition Reviews]]

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 6 - Caters

2009-12-22T17:33:40Z

Pje24:

__NOTOC__
===A Review by Philip Earis - continued===

It’s hard to know what to say about Caters. And whilst you could interpret that as I don’t know what I’m saying about Caters, there is some clear evidence suggesting that there isn’t in fact much new to say. The stage is really rather moribund in many regards. Whether a cause, an effect or both, it undoubtedly remains dominated by Stedman and Grandsire.

You just have to look at some of the key indicators of innovation:

* There hasn’t been a meaningful long length of Caters since March 1990.
* There have been only 7 new Caters methods rung in the past decade. 6 of these are non-descript simple plain methods. Only one is of note – the cyclic and rotationally symmetric principle Flada, rung in Oxford in 2004. Things like Differentials, hybrids and so on all seems to have passed Caters by completely.
* There has only really been one peal of spliced Caters in the past decade. And the emergence of spliced Caters and Royal has only gone to show it’s not easy to achieve a synergistic effect.
* There has been only one handbell peal in the past five years that wasn’t Stedman or Grandsire. And that was Plain Bob.

Indeed, looking at peals.co.uk we see that whilst the total number of peals of Caters seems to have gone up around 10% in the past decade, around 98% of 9-bell peals are either Stedman or Grandsire (with Plain Bob, Erin and Double Norwich making up nearly all the rest)

It almost seems like Caters has turned into a dead zone. It is the stage people ring for a safe peal score or when royal seems a bit tricky, rather than something to be pursued and developed in its own right. This is a great shame, because Caters has so many possibilities and potential.

===The case for the defence===
The likely defence against my argument of stagnation is that innovation, music, excitement and so on can be obtained within the framework of Grandsire or Stedman. Even leaving aside my personal views on the musical qualities and potential of Stedman (the Irish joke about the traveller seeking directions comes to mind), this seems a bit of a bogus response – you don’t find similar arguments at even-bell stages.

Grandsire Caters clearly has many advantages, but even simple but attractive related methods like Double Grandsire (1 peal in the past 25 years) don’t seem to be in the canon.

===Running away===
So what’s been going on in Stedman Caters compositions? Well, the vast majority of compositions still seem to be shuffling deck-chairs on the titanic. You can re-arrange courses of 56s, 65s, so-called “tittums” (3 consecutive bells coursing – I ask you!) until the cows come home, indeed John Hyden has, but the end result is still the same.

Perhaps I’m being unfair. Caters has not been completely immune from trends on other number. The rounds -> queens transition on 10 bells is glorious, especially in methods with coursing music, and has been exploited in elegant multi-part Caters compositions for the first time: a real highlight of the decade. There remains much more scope for related developments.

More generally, there have been very welcome moves towards more bespoke compositions, incorporating cyclic music, and so on. Indeed, on the positive side and for the first time in the centuries Stedman has been rung, the little bells haven’t been completely dropped from the musical equation. This must count as progress.

It’s perhaps a sign of how bad things were in the past that the footnote to Mark Davies’ 2003 composition of 5055 Stedman Caters (no. 2) says, “Believed to be the first performance of a little-bell composition in Stedman's principle”. Any increase of music has got to be a good thing.

===Call of the wild===
The problem is that Stedman disrupts the coursing order, meaning transitions between musical blocks tend to feel forced, and involve lots of bobs, and even when you get there the effect is fleeting anyway. “Chase the row” is the description I give to some of the complex multi-call compositions. Calls can really disrupt the rhythm of ringing. And whilst you can go 25 minutes in a peal of Surprise Maximus without a call, you’ll be lucky to go 25 seconds in many of the complex bespoke peals of Stedman.

The progress in Stedman compositions (with parallels in Grandsire) has come from various directions – David Hull, Mark Eccleston, Rob Lee, Mark Davies, and so on. But is still feels to me at times that people are trying to answer the wrong questions, with the wrong method as a tool.

Mark has been a bit of an evangelist for Caters compositions, especially Grandsire. He invented Flada Caters, and is fizzing with other ideas. In a December 2005 message to the theory list he talked about some of his creations, finishing: “About time some more of these were rung, and not just invented...” I couldn’t agree more.

==1) 54-part Erin Caters – Ander Holroyd – rung May 2003 / November 2004==

This is a fantastic composition in 54-part form, combining a cyclic nine-part structure with the rounds -> queens "magnificent six" transposition, ie:

1234567890 (rounds)
----------
1357924680 (queens)
1594837260 (reverse tittums)
1987654320 (reverse rounds)
1864297530 (reverse queens)
1627384950 (tittums)
1234567890 (rounds)

Erin is the ideal method here, as the regular, unbroken coursing means 5 plain sixes of the method takes you straight from rounds to a “backrounds” six, allowing the method to maximise the music whilst reducing the number of calls.

5022 Erin Caters
123456789
---------
516273849 a
891234567 5b
---------
9-part

a = 1s.6.9s.10.12s.14.15.16.17.18.20s.21.22 (23 sixes)
b = 1s.6s.9s.10.12s.13 (14 sixes)

The original composition was further developed to produce the badboy below:

5076 Erin Caters
123456789
---------
738495162 (a)
975318642 (b)
198765432 (b)
615948372 (b)
468135792 (b)
345678912 (b)
---------
9-part

(a) = s1.s6.s9.10.s12.13 (14 sixes)
(b) = s1.6.s9.10.14.15 (16 sixes)

==2) Flada Caters – Mark B Davies – May 2004==
This article is meant to focus on compositions more than methods, though it’s the method that is the star of the show here.

Flada: 3.1.3.1.3.569.1.569.1.5.9.145.9.145.7.9.7.9.7 = 234567891

The principle - devised by Tom Hinton - combines cyclic leadheads with rotational symmetry to great effect. It was one of a string of great cyclic methods rung near the beginning of the decade.

The division has 19 changes, leading to the interesting consequence that adjacent divisions are rung on opposite strokes.

The method is cleverly structured to include reverse runs round the half-division. A cyclic method can’t have “normal” palindromic symmetry (at least, not without being started away from the symmetry point), but can make use of either rotational (eg Anglia Cyclic) or Glide (eg Double Resurrection) symmetry.

Indeed, somewhat strangely Flada almost resembles a glide-symmetric cyclic method (which automatically includes the property of reverse runs round the half-lead).

The composition itself is functional, even slightly disappointing in that I don’t think it really maximally exploits the generous opportunities the method provides. It keeps the back bells fixed, missing out on the big reverse-run courses, as well as the tittums / queens transition:

5130 Flada Caters

123456 1 2 4 5 9
-----------------
341256 s -
541326 - s 2
145236 - -
415236 s
142536 s s
241356 - 4 -
-----------------
124563 - s s s
415263 s s s
542163 s s s
521436 s s s
245163 s -
524136 s s s
543216 - 4
-----------------
325416 s -
235416 s
235461 s
324561 s s
325461 s
234516 s s s
432156 - -
234165 s s s -
321456 s s s
123456 s s -
-----------------

That said, there’s fantastic scope for further examples.

==3) The emergence of the little bell runs… - Mark Eccleston, David Hull et al. – various==

As mentioned in the introduction of this article, the welcome shift towards little bell music in Stedman and Grandsire continues.

No one composition jumps out to my mind as the definitive example of a “composition of the decade” – the cyclic sections in the 2008 composition below are meant to be a typical illustrative example:

5004 Stedman Caters
Mark R Eccleston

123456789
---------
123456798 s9.11-16 (16)
2413 s1.6.s8.s12.16 |
4321 s1.6.s8.s12.16 |
3142 s1.6.s8.s12.16 |
--------- |
123457698 s1.6.s8.s10.s12.16 |
2413 6.8.s10.16.18 |
4321 6.8.s10.16.18 |
3142 6.8.s10.16.18 |
--------- | A
123465789 1.2.3.5.12 (20) |
2413 6.s8.16 |
4321 6.s8.16 |
3142 6.s8.16 |
--------- |
123465879 6.s8.s12.16 |
2413 s4.s9.s14.18.19 (20) |
4321 s4.s9.s14.18.19 (20) |
---------
312987654 s3.s5.6.8.11.s13.15 (16)
3219 y
291876543 x (16)
2198 y
189765432 x (16)
1987 y
978654321 x (16)
9876 y
---------
123457689 s1.3.7-10.12 (12)
---------
132456798 2.4.7-9.11.s13.14 (14)
---------
423165879 A
---------
798123456 3.5.9-11.13.15-19 (20)
7891 z
819234567 x (16)
8912 z
921345678 x (16)
9123 z
132456789 x (16)
1234 z
---------

x = 6.8.s11.13.14
y = s3.s10.14.s17
z = s3.14
Start with rounds as the last row of a quick six
Contains all near misses; 24 each 56798s, 65789s, 56789s;
6 each 987654s, 876543s, 765432s, 654321s, 123456s, 234567s, 345678s, 456789s.

''Clarrification: There were also compositions involving similar cyclic transitions shortly before this. One example would be 5050 Stedman Caters composed by Richard Grimmett, rung at St Paul's, Birmingham on 26/2/2007 - http://www.campanophile.co.uk/view.aspx?47667''

Addition:'' MBD felt a "defining example of a little-bell Grandsire Caters composition" should also be included here, as it "is probably a better method than Stedman to exhibit the little bells to good effect". I agree entirely, (though without the qualification of the word "probably"), and so am happy to oblige. MBD writes, "David Hull was (I believe) the first to compose little-bell peals in Grandsire, and he has several fantastic peals in this mould...I was inspired by David's example to pursue simpler variants more appropriate to my conducting abilities, and in 2003 produced this effort, which sadly remains unrung. I think it's worthwhile. I have rung most of the courses and transitions in shorter lengths, and they are more wonderful than you might think"''

5075 Grandsire Caters, comp MBD

23456789 1 2 3 4 5
-------------------
32654987 - - S
63254978 - S -
-------------------
35462 - - S |
65432 S 6 leads | A
53264 - - S |
43256 S S |
-------------------
34256879 - - -
23456978 - - S
43652 A*
24356 - - S
42356879 - - -
23546 S -
62345978 - - 6 leads
24563 - - S
-------------------
32465879 - - 6 leads |
43265 - - - | B
24365 - - - |
-------------------
34562 A*
34265978 B
-------------------
56432 - - 6 leads
63254879 S - S
-------------------

Repeat, omitting first two courses.
A* = A with bob for s4
Rounds in last course of final B block

Contains:
28 courses of little-bell music
22 56/65 course ends
Rollercoaster

==4) The extent of Grandsire Caters – Philip Saddleton==
I’m cautious about including the example below, because extents of Grandsire Caters were first published in the 19th Century, I believe. Philip’s composition below seems very logical, though, and I think was first published in 2004 (no doubt he’ll tell me if this is not the case).

Philip described in his inimitable pared-down style how to generate this from first principles in a June 2006 message to this list:

''These are examples of systems of hunts, the basis of many extents. More generally:
* find a block where a subset of the bells occupy each possible combination of positions (WHWH)
* find a calling that does not disturb this subset, but cycles the remaining bells - this gives an equivalent block for a larger subset (WHWx3)
* repeat as necessary, with a calling that fixes one more bell at each step (WHWx3 sH)''

362880 Grandsire Caters

23456789 1 3 4
------------------
43628579 - - s | | |
63847259 - - s | | |
38765429 - - - | | |
87532649 - - - |A | |
57284369 - - s | | |
27456839 - - s | | |
47623589 - - s | | |
------------------ | |
67348259 - - s | |C |
37865429 - - s | | |
78532649 - - - | | |
85274369 - - - |B | |
52486739 - - - | | |E
42653879 - - s | | |
62347589 - - s | | |
------------------ | |
76234 2B | |
43625789 2A | |
------------------ |
63542 C |
------------------ |
57263489 A | |
63572 4B |D |
54263789 A | |
------------------ |
35426 2D |
------------------
25364 3C |F
42536 2D |
------------------
24356 2F
------------------
45326 E |
54236 2F |G
43256 E |
------------------
324 G
------------------
Repeat

==5) Spliced Caters (4/5m) – Don Morrison – first rung March 2008==
Perhaps indicating the paucity of source material to select from, I think this (and its sister 4m composition) are probably the only examples of spliced Caters produced in the decade. Even then, the novelty is a bit doubtful – I think Steve Coaker may have come up with something similar in the mid 1990s.

Anyway, whilst it’s hard to get genuinely excited about this – both the choice of methods, music, and method transitions – there is some interest here. It’s better than a kick in the teeth…

5,051 Spliced Caters (5m)
Erin
123456789 4 5 6
241397568 (a)
31942 - - |
41923 - 2 - |A
39124 - - |
23914 s - |
14923 A |B
41329 2B
Stedman
413297568 6 8 15 16
214365798 (b)
132465 s -
341265 s -
423165 s -
241365 s s - 3
432165 s -
314265 s -
123465 s - (+ a single at 19)
Double Norwich Court Bob
(123465978) 1 3 5 7
135462978 s s
42365 s 2*
24365 s -
34265 s
43265 s -
32465 s s
63425 s - s
Grandsire
63425978 1 2 3 4
56324 - - s
35624 - - -
43526 - - s
54326 - - -
35426 - - -
63524 - - s
36524879 - - -
43625 - - s
64325 - - -
46523 - - s s
Plain Bob
46523879 W M H
54362 - - 4
24365 - 2+
Round at handstroke eight leads after the final call.
(a) = s1.2.s4.5.6.s8 (8 sixes)
(b) = s1.3.5.6.s10.12.14.17
2* = s -;
4 = s - s -;
2+ = - s.
Bobs in Double Norwich are place notation 3 instead of 5 as the treble hunts from 2 to 1; singles are place notation 345 instead of 5 as the treble hunts from 2 to 1.

Note on the Double Norwich start: A Stedman single is called at the
very end of the Stedman block (this is indicated above as at 19 in the Stedman, though if Stedman were continuing to be rung after this it would be at 1 in the following course), taking effect during the change into Double Norwich, thus:
213647589 last six of Stedman
231465798
321647589
312465798
132647589 single called
123465798
214356798 start of Double Norwich
241537689
425136798
452317689
543271698
etc.
Contains 1,080 Stedman, 1,074 Erin, 1,008 Double Norwich Court Bob, 1,007 Plain Bob and 882 Grandsire
4 changes of method, atw

==See Also==
*[[Compositions of the Decade 1 - Introduction]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 2 - Doubles]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 3 - Minor]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 4 - Triples]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 5 - Major]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 7 - Royal]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 8 - Cinques]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 9 - Maximus]]
[[Category: Composition Reviews]]

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 5 - Major

2009-12-22T17:33:23Z

Pje24:

__NOTOC__
===A Review by Philip Earis - continued===

Quite simply, things have got better and better for eight bell compositions over the decade.

It may be a slight caricature, but for the last quarter of the 20th century much (most?) 8-bell ringing was objectionable. There was a preponderance of mediocre compositions and bad methods.

===Single Method Madness===
The problems were acute for many single method peals. Misguided preconceptions led to a fixation on "surprise" methods, on bad methods with familiar overworks and non-descript underworks (indeed many awful new rung methods were simply selected because they had an unrung notation), on keeping the tenors together, on avoiding 87s at backstroke, and on CRU-based compositions (often 3-parts).

The advent of software like BYROC both typified the problem and made things worse - instead of being a tool to allow better possibilities, it was built with pre-conceptions about desired outputs, and actually exacerbated the problem.

===Spliced No Surprise===
Sadly, when bands also ventured into spliced major ringing it was like a race to the bottom. The so-called "standard 8" seemed to be the default option, with occasional forays into Pitman's series. Prior to the current decade, I'm struggling to think of a single spliced major composition that has significant musical, as opposed to historic or challenging, merit.

===A Decade of Improvement===
So how have things changed in the past decade? Well, happily there has been an improvement across the board. Whilst 8-bell ringing is still predominately based on treble-dodging major, people are not so obsessed with surprise. Delight methods (and good delight methods) seem much more common.

Looking at the methods that people ring, the overall number of peals has been stable. However, towerbell peals of Rutland, Lincolnshire and Pudsey Major (a barometer for mediocrity) are down 25%, 11% and 31% respectively over the current decade compared with the 1990s.

A very tangible advance has been in composition for single method peals. The meritless three-part seems a lot less common these days, whilst the bespoke one part containing lots of runs has been on the up. BYROC feels very anachronistic - the vastly superior SMC32 seems to be used much more frequently, giving genuinely worthwhile results. Congratulations must go to Mark Davies and Graham John, its architects.

===The Extent of Hull===
One of the main drivers for progress over the decade has been David Hull. He has produced consistently great new methods and compositions, which have been very influential. The problem with trying to pick out "compositions of the decade" is that it's hard to reflect a consistent high-quality body of work - there perhaps isn't any one particular Hull single-method composition that stands out (though I do like the look of his 5152 no.2 of Superlative).

So whilst I haven't included anything of his on the list below, I think homage to the un-specified Hull 1-part composition should be paid. Consider it item (0) on the list.

New composers like Alan Reading have also come onto the scene, again consistently delivering neat and "tuned" compositions. More generally, many of the compositions I have selected below come from relatively young composers. This must be healthy for ringing.

===A Tangled Web===
Another notable feature of the ringing decade has been the continued rise of computers for generating and the internet for storing and sharing ringing information. Don Morrison - surely the decade's most prolific composer - deserves much credit for his ongoing work with http://www.ringing.org, including seeding it with a lively mix of his own compositions. Meanwhile Michael Wilby's http://www.compositions.org.uk, populated by a high-powered more select stable of composers, has been a consistently excellent resource.

This notwithstanding, compositions remain scattered across the web in an ad-hoc way. I repeat my desire for a more stable, consistent repository, and it is hoped the Graham John's recent efforts at spearheading a comprehensive new database will bear fruit in the months and years to come.

===A New Generation of Spliced Compositions===
In parallel to the developments with single-method peal developments over the decade, another huge theme has been with advances with spliced major. It has been a superb decade for spliced major - a real golden age. Clever thinking and eager peal bands have pushed back limits of length and complexity. Indeed, it has been arguably the first time in history of ringing where long-length attempts have really involved cutting edge multi-method compositions.

Enhanced computer power has helped here, and not always new software. Philip Saddleton's SCAMP has played a part in several of my selected compositions, whilst many other composers have used their own customised tool-kits to produce innovative new compositions in familiar sets of methods, as we shall see.

Thinking away from the most cutting edge, there has been an across-the-board shift in spliced major ringing. Moving away from the over-emphasis on ringing "8-spliced", the decade has seen a clear branching out into more exciting terrain. As a crude indicator of this, by comparing the current decade to the 1990s we see that the number of peals of 8-spliced has dropped by 19%, whilst the number of peals of 23-spliced has risen by more than 29%.

===Scope for Further Progress===
Despite the rosy optimism, we are not in the promised land yet. Trends are evident, but there remains a lot of intransigence and ignorance. There have still been 700 peals of Rutland Major rung in the past decade. Plain, alliance and treble place methods are still neglected. Different types of symmetries and lead heads (including cyclic methods) continue to have much potential. Near the beginning of the decade Philip Saddleton produced a method with double offset symmetry which remains unrung - +(x4.5.36.4.5x6.5.6.5.6x5.4.36.5.4x3.4.3.4.3), which shows both the progress of the past decade, and the change in attitudes that is still needed.

Onwards and upwards...

==1)12-spliced major (cyclic 7-part palindrome with all 96 runs) - Rob Lee - February 2009==

The decade has seen huge progress in the development of spliced major compositions. A key factor has been using cyclic 7-part constructions, both to get all-the-work and to ensure that music in any one part is multiplied across all the parts.

Right at the end of 1999 David Hull produced his cyclic 23-spliced composition - this set a new benchmark, containing 40 of the 96 possible run-rows of each type (ie 5678xxxx, 8765xxxx, xxxx5678, xxxx8765).

A fair few composers have turned to the cyclic construction to produce new compositions in familiar groups of methods like Smiths and Chandlers 23-spliced, as we shall later in this article.

However, since David Hull's composition, particular attention has been given to increasing the run-count up to the ideal maximum of 96. Various compositions were put together by for example Don Morrison containing 55 / 96 run rows (http://ringing.org/main/pages/printable?id=853&collection=peals), by me containing between 65-89 / 96 runs rows (eg http://www.cantabgold.net/users/pje24/earis23.html), and by Alan Reading, who ultimately got all 96 runs in both 6-method and 23-method compositions.

However, the shining light of all of these is Rob Lee's palindromic 12-method composition which he produced earlier in 2009, and about which I expounded at length in September (http://www.bellringers.org/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2009-September/003031.html)

It combines a clever design structure with nice methods to produce a supreme composition.

5152 Spliced S Major (14 [12] methods) 
2345678 Straker's Passage S
3527486 Speedball S
4263857 Revolver S
6482735 Speedball S
7856342 Straker's Passage S
-7864523 Zonda S
3526478 Taunton S
4283756 Panamera S
8472635 Helium S
6758342 Xanadu S
-5678342 Tattersalls S
6854723 Bolonium S
2347856 Uracco S
-4237856 Evora S
8364527 Evora S
-7568234 Uracco S
6725483 Jovium S
3482567 Tattersalls S
-3426875 Xanadu S
2384567 Bridgwater S
8253746 Panamera S
5872634 Taunton S
6745382 Zonda S
-8234567

==2) 22400 Spliced Surprise Major (100m atw) - Paul Needham - Rung October 2005==

Simon Linford promised the College Youths that before his year as Master was over, there would be several ground-breaking Society ringing performances. Like JFK's pledge to put a man on the moon, this promise left a bit of work for other people to fill in some of the details...

Paul Needham fully succeeded in meeting Simon's challenge to produce an appropriate 100 method all-the-work peal of major. Unlike Philip Saddleton, who had previously turned his hand to the problem, Paul cleverly started with Norman Smith's familiar 23-spliced as a template, and then expanded by inserting additional methods into the framework.

His composition contains all 12 leadhead groups, all of Smith's methods, and all but two of Chandler's 23-spliced methods also. There is no "trick" to the new methods used, nor use of multiple trivial variations.

Instead, we just see new rows inserted using a wide range of regular methods that will accommodate them. Many of the methods used are amongst the "falsest" ever rung, though this is of no consequence in a multi-spliced peal.

The composition has pushed back boundaries in several regards, and its influence will be felt in years to come.

12345678 Yorkshire
- 13578264 Uxbridge
- 12735486 Go
13247658 Old Kent Road
- 13275486 Whitechapel Road
12538764 Kings Cross
- 15864273 Angel
- 16584273 Euston Road
- 18654273 Pentonville Road
- 12586347 Just Visiting
13872456 Pall Mall
- 18256347 Electric
13578426 White Hall
16427835 Northumberland Avenue
- 15826347 Marylebone Station
14763825 Bow Street
- 17325486 Cornwall
14267835 Double Dublin
16482573 Bristol
18654327 Whalley
- 13586742 Watford
18375264 London
17823456 Tavistock
15634827 Glasgow
16452378 Cambridge
- 14278635 Mulcaster
- 17428635 Willesden
- 15627348 Marlborough Street
12536874 Vine Street
- 12567348 Free Parking
17458236 Strand£220
13682457 Fleet Street
- 16257348 Esplanade
13586427 Sussex
- 12748635 Cassiobury
- 18356742 Lindum
15873264 Superlative
- 18364527 Mont du Jubile
- 16834527 Newcastle
18462375 Glamorgan
12745836 Essex
15376284 Columbium
- 13684527 Wembley
- 15836742 Rutland
- 17358264 Jersey
18634725 Preston
14265873 Ipswich
- 17386542 Trafalgar Square
13674825 Fenchurch Street Station
- 14258673 Leicester Square
18723465 Coventry Street
- 15428673 Waterworks
- 12548673 Piccalilli
15827436 Go To Jail
- 18736542 Regent Street
14265738 Oxford Street
- 13876542 Cray
15723486 Ashtead
- 18642357 Kingwood
17354286 Northampton
- 12573648 Hertfordshire
- 17253648 Ebeneezer
- 18657423 Spilsby
12374658 Beaumont Hill
- 13458267 Belfast
- 15348267 Hertford
- 14538267 Sonning
- 15867423 Tellurium
18752634 Buckfastleigh
14635287 Eggybread
12374865 Moulton
- 16587423 Aldenham
- 15723648 Corbiere
- 13486725 Yeading
- 18346725 Antioch
- 12574683 Lonestar
- 12548736 Chertsey
- 14258736 Maufont
- 15428736 Claybrooke
- 17254683 Sir Isaac Newton
- 12483765 Bond 007
- 18243765 Liverpool Street Station
- 14823765 Chesterfield
- 15724683 Lulworth
- 14836725 Lincoln
- 18625473 Lamoye
- 12865473 Petersfield
- 14628357 Ardotalia
- 12468357 Isle Of Wight
18547236 Park Lane
- 16248357 Malpas
13476528 Amersham
- 16285473 Richmond
- 14862357 Herefordshire
12587436 Newlyn
13674582 Oxney
- 16482357 Lincolnshire
- 14257638 Ditchling
- 15427638 Hereford
- 12547638 Pudsey
--------
- 15738264

==3) 5056 Bristol Surprise Major - Mark B Davies - Rung December 2007==

Bristol major is hardly an unexplored field, but the huge majority of previously-rung Bristol compositions have contained multiple calls around the course-end, often in the misguided attempt to load up on CRUs.

Mark instead took the simple but brilliant approach of letting the glorious method generate the music more naturally. He has put together a series of very innovative Bristol Major compositions, which have many fewer calls (and consequently more courses) than previous examples.

The pick of the bunch is Mark's 5056, which in his words, "...is special because it also achieves the goal of 'no duffers' - that is, not one of its 19 courses contain undesirable coursing orders, apart from isolated transitional leads around the course end. This is a remarkable achievement which I have not discovered in any other 'short-course' arrangement. The seamless link from one musical course to the next is achieved, on average, by fewer than 1.8 calls"

This is a most beautiful single-method composition - everything about it just "works".

5056 no.1 / 5120 no.2 
23456 M B W H
--------------
42356 -
54326 -
54263 - -
32465 - 5 -
26354 -
43652 - -
43526 - -
24536 -
43265 -
45362 2 -
63254 - -
52436 - -
34625 - - *
26543 - -
64352 - 2
23456 - -
--------------
For 5120, call 2M B 2W for course marked *

==4) 40320 Spliced TD major (4-360m) - Ander Holroyd - composed September 2004==
(Also a "shout" to a composition on a different plan by Tony Cox, 2002)

Extents of plain major have been around for many years. Treble-dodging methods are much harder to find extents for. Internal falseness rules out extents for the huge majority of methods.

Nevertheless, extents for some treble dodging methods have been known for some time. A few methods with the "cleanest" falseness, such as Derwent, lend themselves easily to extents. In 1974 Colin Wyld published an extent of Yorkshire Major - Richard Smith deconstructed this in a June 2005 message to this list: http://www.bellringers.org/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2005-June/000951.html

However, before the present decade I don't think any extents of spliced treble-dodging major (at least apart from trivial lead-splice Derwent variants) were known.

Ander Holroyd changed all that in 2004, producing clever extents first in 4 methods (including on a 7-part plan), rising up to 360 methods.

The extents draw on developments in magic-block minor ringing. In Ander's composition, though, the overwork always changes at the leadhead, whilst the underwork always changes at the halflead. By using asymmetric over and underworks, the effect of a "pseudo-single" at each halflead and leadend can be achieved, making the problem of getting an extent analogous to minor.

<pre>
2345678
----------------------------------------------------------
UqoP GaqG ZqlQ Fsh& NguI ZxmY A=hF Wa<F @br# Kb>I 4582673
Pg=N YirE XcyP GtmF TpjQ HfvA Yhy$ NkuF Tfr@ OvdF 2735864
Q<jC PcuB WdvE $brV ObvM RfrB TtdD @zcE &=nB Q+a& 7425386
E>fI PkuE $zhB Vm>R IsgR Jsk# Ee+# KkyW DczP MtdY 8573264
AtiT HucM PwoN &tbX Kg=L X+jI RrdA $eqT HbtU GxfK 6237584
$+lZ JxfQ B>fO WqlU Ce+H @vf# EmtZ JkzV BxfM SqlR 5467382
MqaB Wh=S GpaF Qg=J R+lO @mxF TaiQ HriF 4287653
WnsZ GynF @ugI Z<lI UsnN YshV Oj+N Y<aL XksN &o<N 4763258
#sg$ KrfC Sm>@ DqaJ RksL XguY K+aU JyhD W=nU JixY 8523746
L+lK Y>iI ZpjM Pb>K XwoG Std@ DynT HkuR I+jU CtiZ 8726435
MbrF @eqC PvdE $woA &ycV DtbE Xew@ Hl<T BmvC Rzc$ 6357248
AqoL #gzE #i>H VdxL #jwO WtiU IkyS MpeS CcyN #lwK 7348562
$kzC Uf>Q OtmW BirI U<lC RwlM Zap& Ln=G UpjK XzkQ 7283456
OzhA XopS J<o$ NapW Oc=$ NixU J+eA &m># LkyL Ya+P 5428637
I<jT BshS JgzM SdxT DewV D=hE XvfZ GdrY KzgH VvbR 5437286
CpeP Cb>F Wxd& LgsQ OewE &qeM ZjwC So<L &xiL YnsT 7238546
DmxN #ucA X=cS JnuV HjwM Rj<# Kun& Amv$ Ayh@ HzhG 8234567
----------------------------------------------------------
7 part

Each group of 4 symbols represents one lead.
All lead ends and half leads rung 18.

Methods
Above
A: -5-4-5-36
B: -5-4-5-3
C: -5-4-56-36
D: -5-4-56-3
E: -56-4-5-36
F: -56-4-5-3
G: -56-4-56-3
H: 56-5.4.5-5.36
I: 56-5.4.56-5.36
J: 56-5.4.5-56.3
K: 56-5.4.56-56.3
L: 56-56.4.5-5.36
M: 56-56.4.56-5.36
N: 56-56.4.5-56.3
O: 56-56.4.56-56.3
P: -5-4.5-5.36
Q: -5-4.56-5.36
R: -5-4.5-56.3
S: -5-4.56-56.3
T: -56-4.5-5.36
U: -56-4.56-5.36
V: -56-4.5-56.3
W: -56-4.56-56.3
X: 56-5.4-5-36
Y: 56-5.4-5-3
Z: 56-5.4-56-36
&: 56-5.4-56-3
@: 56-56.4-5-36
#: 56-56.4-5-3
$: 56-56.4-56-3
Below
a: -4-5-4-
b: -4-5-34-
c: -4-5-2-
d: -34-5-4-
e: -2-5-4-
f: 4-4.5.4-34
g: 4-4.5.2-34
h: 4-34.5.4-34
i: 4-34.5.2-34
j: 4-2.5.4-34
k: 4-2.5.2-34
l: 2-4.5.4-34
m: 2-4.5.2-34
n: 2-34.5.4-34
o: 2-2.5.4-34
p: -4-5.4-34
q: -34-5.4-34
r: -2-5.4-34
s: 4-4.5-4-
t: 4-4.5-34-
u: 4-4.5-2-
v: 4-34.5-4-
w: 4-34.5-34-
x: 4-34.5-2-
y: 4-2.5-4-
z: 4-2.5-34-
<: 4-2.5-2-
>: 2-4.5-4-
+: 2-4.5-34-
=: 2-4.5-2-
</pre>
Working independently a couple of years before Ander, Tony Cox put together an extent based on systematically joining together quarter-leads from three treble-dodging methods "...so that 78 never make any internal places within a section and just ring a stretched version of Double Norwich"

A k -56-14-56-36-34-58-34-18 (Norfolk)
B k -78-14-78-36-12-58-12-18
C k -34-14-12-18-78-58-56-18

Tony's basic block of 3 courses with sixths place bobs at 4ths is

AABB
AACB
CAAC (bob)
AACA
BABC
CBAB
ACAA
CABA
BCCB
ABAC (bob)
AAAB
BAAA
CBAA
BBAA
ABBA
AABB
AABC (bob)
BCAA
BBAA
CBCA
ACBC

In Tony's words, "Note the quarter lead change is 16 when the first quarter lead is C and 38 when the second quarter is C. In the second half of the lead it is 38 at the 3/4 lead if C is used in the 3 quarter and 16 if C is used in the 4th quarter.

The extent is then obtained by adding calls to the tenor-together courses to join the 60 in-course courses together". For example for a 3 part:
IOOO 35426
IVOOO 62534
IVOOO 43265
V 53462
IIIVO 35264
VVOsHsH 54263
OO 25463
VOO 23564
Repeat twice

==5) Assorted fun with Smith's and Chandler's==
*John Goldthorpe (8-part Chandlers) - January 2007
*John Goldthorpe (45-spliced major) - 2005
*Don Morrison (Cyclic Smiths, Cyclic Chandlers) - 2002
*Richard Pearce (23 spliced)
 
There has been lots of development with "established" groups of 23-spliced methods in the past decade. Don Morrison has published a lively range of new compositions for the sets of both Smith's and Chandler's methods. He has produced alternative compositions with both cyclic and regular partends. Don's cyclic Chandler's is perhaps the pick of the bunch:

5,152 Spliced Surprise Major (23 methods)
Donald F Morrison (no. 5) 
2345678 Newlyn
7856342 Moulton
-4235678 Sonning
5728463 Pudsey
8673542 Essex
3462857 Claybrooke
-8634725 London
3876542 Richmond
7358264 Sussex
-6425873 Whalley
2684357 Malpas
-3826745 Caterham
-2386745 Newcastle
3624857 Colnbrook
6435278 Buckfastleigh
8273564 Northampton
7852436 Willesden
-6457382 Yeading
5634278 Belfast
3526847 Chertsey
2385764 Chesterfield
7842635 Glasgow
8273456 Bristol
-7823456

John Goldthorpe meanwhile has put together 8-part all the work compositions of Chandlers, including the neat feature of using a "x" as the change to vary the treble.

5632 Spliced Surprise Major (22 methods)
John M Goldthorpe (No 2) 
12345678 Willesden
S 61482735 Whalley
68174523 Richmond
S 76851342 Malpas
73526481 Claybrooke
S 27345168 Colnbrook
23576481 Moulton
21487635 Sonning
S 72345168 Sussex
S 87164523 Chertsey
S 78164523 Huddersfield
S 47213856 Caterham
41782635 Bristol
48167523 Northampton
46851372 Chesterfield
43526781 Newcastle
S 54638217 Belfast
53426781 Buckfastleigh
51782634 London
58167423 Newlyn
S 25374168 Yeading
27513846 Essex
23456781
8 part. S=x.

John also has produced an enticing 8-part Chandler's composition with treble changing singles at most leads:

5888 Spliced Surprise Major (23 methods)
by John M Goldthorpe 
12345678 Willesden
S 61847235 Caterham
S 16482735 Newcastle
S 41628357 Essex
S 54876321 Chertsey
S 45783621 Sonning
S 34725168 Northampton
S 23148756 Bristol
S 32417856 Buckfastleigh
S 83615247 London
81326754 Newlyn
S 58643721 Claybrooke
S 45781632 Colnbrook
S 74518326 Moulton
S 67238145 Chesterfield
S 16534728 Sussex
S 81274365 Richmond
S 78315246 Whalley
71823654 Malpas
76241583 Belfast
S 67425183 Pudsey
S 56487312 Yeading
58634271 Huddersfield
--------
S 45678123
8 part. S=3456.
256 of each method.
183 com, all the work.

A further Goldthorpe composition of note is his 45m atw 10080 change composition incorporating all of Smiths and Chandler's methods, with a few requested others to push the peal over 10000 changes.

Finally in this section, Richard Pearce has a tidy and elegant "bonus" 23-spliced composition which doesn't need much learning, as it incorporates methods from several established "series" of one part peals of Spliced Surprise Major (specifically Pitman's 9, the "Nottingham 8", Crosland's series, and the so-called "Standard" 8, Belfast and Glasgow.

5152 Spliced Surprise Major 
12345678 Rutland
-------------------
14263857 Superlative
-12357486 Belfast
15243678 Lincoln
-12378564 Dorchester
18634257 Lessness
-12386745 Lindum
18273564 Yorkshire
13624857 Cambridge
14567382 Glasgow
15748623 Cassiobury
-18236745 London
13872564 Pudsey
12684357 Adelaide
15743682 Ealing
-16457238 Brighton
17348625 Eccleston
-13825764 Cornwall
17243685 Watford
14762538 Chesterfield
15684372 Wembley
18536247 Lincolnshire
-15647823 Bristol
-------------------
-14567823
7 part

Whilst in all these compositions the musical content is not especially notable, it is often reasonable and they are all fine examples of well-crafted compositions following a tightly-constrained method selection.

==6) Long lengths (London major, Bristol Major) - Brian Price and Richard Smith - 2005==

The decade has seen other boundaries pushed back, with record lengths in single methods also. In April 2005 a new record length of 17280 London major was rung at Spitalfields: this represented a relatively significant increase over the previous record of 14784 (dating from 1996).

The composition was a 5-part by Brian Price, and raised some eyebrows as it was not in fact all the work - the 7th is never 2nds place bell for a first half- lead and the 8th is never 4ths place bell for a second half-lead. That notwithstanding, I feel the composition deserves inclusion.

Richard Smith explains in detail how it was constructed here: http://www.bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2005-May/000941.html

17280 London Surprise Major
by Brian D Price 
23456 M H
-----------------
42356 a
63254 - a
26354 a
32654 a
46253 - a
62453 a -
34256 - a
46325 - a x
53624 - a
65324 a
36524 a
45623 - a
-----------------
5 part.
a = s2½,In,W,s6½. s=1678. x is a 6th's place bob. Contains 144 crus.

The record length of Bristol Major has remained at 23296 since June 1974. In the past decade both Brian and Richard Smith have produced significantly longer compositions that this. Brian has a 9-part 28512 change composition using a mixture of 4ths and 6ths place bobs, whilst Richard has published a 3-part composition entirely in whole courses.

28512 Bristol Surprise Major
by Brian D Price 
2345678
6 4263578
6452837
4 5642837
4 4562837
6485723
6 8674523
7856342
6 5738642
4 3578642
4 7358642
6 5763842
6587234
6 8625734
4 2865734
6278453
7642385
4 4762385
4 6472385
7634528
4 3764528
6 6357428
4 5637428
4 3567428
6 6345728
4 4635728
3476852
4 7346852
4 4736852
3487265
4 8347265
4 4837265
6 3428765
6 2374865
4 7234865
4 3724865
2387546
4 8237546
4 3827546
6 2358746
4 5238746
4 3528746
6 2375846
6 7283546
8752634
5867423
6 6548723
4 4658723
6 5476823
6 7584623
8765342
6837254
4 3687254
8326475
4 2836475
3248567
4352786
6 5473286
6 7524386
4 2754386
6 5237486
3542678
4365827
6 6483527
6 8654327
4 5864327
4 6584327
6 8635427
4 3865427
4 6385427
8643752
4 4863752
4 6483752
6 8674352
6 7836452
4 3786452
4 8376452
7843265
4 4783265
4 8473265
7824536
4 2784536
6 8257436
4 5827436
4 2587436
6 8245736
4 4825736
2478653
4 7248653
4 4728653
2467385
6234578
4 3624578
6 2356478
5243867
6 4582367
4 8452367
4 5842367
6 4538267
-------
6*3425867
9 part, calling 6* in parts 3, 6 and 9 only.
Contains 120 combination rollups.

26,880 Bristol S. Major
Comp. Richard A Smith 
234567 M F I O V W H
----------------------------
362457 - - -
563427 ss -
(635427) -
346725 - 3 -
567324 2
635427 - -
265437 2 -
237654 ss - -
743625 - 2 - ss
463725 -
532467 2 2 -
257364 -
(453627) - -
564723 - -
453627 -
365724 - - -
673425 - 3 -
(342567) - 2
453762 - -
345762 2
325764 s ss
342567 s - -
----------------------------
Twice repeated
b = 16, s = 1678

==7) 8-spliced major - Don Morrison (2003), Alan Reading (2006)==
Much as I dislike the concept, let alone the content of the so-called "standard 8", people do keep ringing this. It's better for people to have at least a hint of music in their compositions, so that they can hopefully work out what is deficient in their standard musical diet. The two compositions below are notable efforts in very testing conditions. I still have no desire to ring them, though!

5184 (5056) Spliced Surprise Major (8 methods)
by Donald F Morrison (no. 3) 
23456 B M W H Methods
52436 - RS.L
42635 - NYS.CL
23564 2 - YN.LP.BBBRRP.
36245 - CP.PC
24365 - [-] N(SSY).R.
Repeat five times, omitting [-] from alternate parts.
Contains all 24 each 56s, 65s, and 5678s off the front, and 12 8765s off the front

5120 8 Spliced Surprise Major
by Alan Reading 
23456 M B W H
36452 - 2 R,PL,B,
43562 V/sV (B/4/I) - C,B.S(,RCL,B,)SRN,
43625 - - YY,YY,
36425 (4/I/B) s3/s4 2 NRS(,B,LCR,)S.B.C,B,
42365 - - LP,R,
6 part, omitting bracketed calls and methods from any 4 parts.
Contains all 24 each 56s, 65s, and 5678s off the front, and 12 8765s off the front

==8) 23-spliced Treble Bob Major - Peter King - 2005==
This composition, as yet unpublished, contains 23 different treble bob major methods. It has limited musical scope, the methods lack intrinsic merit, there is no clever composing trick - it's just the composition is really, fiendishly, difficult to ring. The fluid nature of treble-bob methods makes them much harder to learn and differentiate than surprise, as they lack long static pieces of work in any one place.

On his website, John Goldthorpe has a footnote to a composition of 8-part Chandlers saying "Arguably the hardest peal yet rung". This seems pretty anachronistic (and grandiose). I can assure him that Chandler's is a walk in the park, especially when compared to the King major composition.

==9) Whole-course 23-spliced - Richard Smith - January 2005==
Responding to a challenge in 2005, Richard produced the first real spliced major composition in "complete" unbroken whole courses. This is a very neat proof of concept, though is awaiting further development. Perhaps something along the lines of Richard Pearce's minor compositions (ie including 8ths place methods, so the composition wasn't based purely around homes) could be interesting here?
<pre>
m0 = &-3-6-5-36-34-5-6-5;
m1 = &-5-4-56-6-4-5-2-5; // [Heydour]
m2 = &5-5.6.5-2.3-2-5-4-1;
m3 = &-3-4-56-6-2-5-4-5; // [Lessness]
m4 = &36-5.4-5-6-2-5-36-5;
m5 = &-5-4-2-3-34-5-4-3;
m6 = &-3-6-56-3-34-5.36-56.3;
m7 = &-5-6-5-6-2-5-56-5;
m8 = &3-5.6.5-2.3.2-2.3-2-3;
m9 = &-56-6-5-3.4-2.3.2-34.5;
m10 = &-34-4-5-3-4-5-34-1;
m11 = &-34-4-2-6-2-5-2-7;
m12 = &34-36.4.5-2.3.2-4.5.6-6.7;
m13 = &-34-4-2-3-4-5-36-1;
m14 = &-34-4-5-6-2-3-6-3; // [Xyster]
m15 = &-34-4-5-3-2-5-6-3;
m16 = &-5-6-5-3-2-5-56-3; // [Helston]
m17 = &-5-4-2-3-2-5-36-5;
m18 = &-5-4-56-36-2-5-2-5;
m19 = &-5-4-5-6-2-5-2-1; // [Aspenden]
m20 = &-5-4-5-6-4-5-6-7;
m21 = &-5-4-56-3-2-3-56-3;
m22 = &-5-4-5-6-2-3-6-1;

5152 TD Major
H 23456
--------------
x ) A 42635
- ) 64235
A 52643
- 65243
3A 53462
3x 62345
4A 34256
- 23456
--------------
-=14; x=16
</pre>

==See Also==
*[[Compositions of the Decade 1 - Introduction]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 2 - Doubles]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 3 - Minor]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 4 - Triples]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 6 - Caters]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 7 - Royal]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 8 - Cinques]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 9 - Maximus]]
[[Category: Composition Reviews]]

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 4 - Triples

2009-12-22T17:33:06Z

Pje24:

__NOTOC__
===A Review by Philip Earis - continued===

The 1990s was a landmark time for triples. The first peal of bobs-only Stedman in 1995 was of course notable, though Andrew Johnson’s 10-part construction later that year was the crowning compositional glory. The decade finished with the 1999 publication of Philip Saddleton’s composition collection for Stedman and Erin triples, summarizing progress to date. It can be seen at http://www.ringing.info/stedman.pdf.

So what has happened in the past 10 years? Has it been simply a case of tying up a few loose ends? Well, no, not really. Whereas the 1990s saw compositional progress in a few familiar and simple methods, this has been expanded in the past decade, leading to developments across an interesting range of methods.

A driving motivation remains of producing peals consisting of pure triple changes (ie only using the changes 1,3,5 and 7). It is true that the compositional challenge of bobs-only Erin triples remains unsolved - the likely suspects have invested quite a lot of time into the problem, so far without tangible success. However, a key theme of recent years has been the creation of interesting new triple-change compositions, as we shall see.

Triples composing is arguably the most mathematically-intense stage. Compositions are almost exclusively based around 5040 change extents – there is no room for the selectivity of higher stages, nor typically the flexibility offered by multi-extent blocks at lower stages. Things have to work for a good reason, and hence beauty and elegance are often evident.

The innovative new compositions I have selected below have come from a fairly small community of composers. The formidable triples-ringing strength of the Birmingham band has been very evident, and indeed a driver for many of the compositional developments.

==1) Quick Six Triples – Philip Saddleton – Composition unrung (method first rung December 2004)==

“Quick six” triples, as the name suggests, has 30-change divisions consisting of quick sixes. It was the winning touch in the “Triples Eisteddfod” in Birmingham in December 2004.

The notation is:
3.1.7.1.3.1.3.1.7.1.3.1.3.1.7.1.3.1.3.1.7.1.3.1.3.1.7.1.3.7

It's a beauty. Philip Saddleton, its creator, regards it “the most straightforward construction” of an extent of triples. And he’s a man who should know.

5040 Quick Six Triples 
123456 4 6 7
----------------
415263 - - -
642315 - -
465312 -
514623 - -
256314 - -
524316 -
351264 - - -
632451 - -
361452 -
153624 - -
216453 - -
321546 - -
----------------
Repeat

In Philip’s words:

“The coset graph for the Scientific group using these three place notations consists of five hexagons with other links and this Hamiltonian cycle is easily found. The blocks can be linked by replacing two quick sixes (the last two for the composition below) by two slow sixes, traversing the hexagons in reverse, and cunningly joining two blocks without introducing any false rows”

Who wouldn't love traversing hexagons in reverse? Whilst extremely tidy, my feeling remains that a call only acts on one row, meaning the composition would be better described as spliced.

In a similar concept, see also compositional choice “Artistic Triples” later in this article.

''(Correction: Philip Saddleton points out that he "...first produced a composition in the early 1980s - we went for it in Cambridge but lost it after five parts of six. I think that the method was first discovered by John Carter". Eddie Martin adds that "...A.J. Pitman certainly published 5040s of it in the 1920s". So the case for including Quick Six as something innovative seems rather reduced. It still remains unpealed, though.)''

==2) Titanic Triples – Alan Burbidge – January 2005==
Titanic is sort of Stedman reduced – it consists of one row of right-hunting on three followed by one row of wrong-hunting on three. The notation for a division is simply 7.1.7.3 – this gives a course with two types of “six”.

The cinques was first pealed in 1987, but the past decade saw the first composition of an extent of Titanic Triples – a tour-de-force 3-part composition by Alan Burbidge, which is reproduced from the St Martin’s Guild website as below.

''(Correction: Richard Grimmett points out that "Eddie Martin came up with the first composition of Titanic Triples. I failed to call it and asked Alan to come up with something I would cope better with. Hence the composition you included")''

5040 Titanic Triples 
1234567 A B C
4352167 - - -
2534167 - B6 -
4315267 - - -
5123467 - - -
3241567 - - -
1423567 - B6 -
3254167 - - -
4523167 - B6 -
3215467 - - -
5142367 - - -
2415367 - B6 -
5134267 - - -
4321567 - - -
1253467 - - -
3542167 - C*
2453167 - B6 -
- B6
3521467 B6* -
1245367 - - -
5432167 - - -
2314567 - - -
3 times
7th unaffected
6th sub observation 
Can be transposed for 1/2 observations with normal start.
1 unaffected, 2 sub observation 
Standard
A S8, S13
B S1, 3, S7, S8, S12
C 3, S5, S6, S7, S10, 12, 13 
Variations
B6 S1, 3, 6, S7, S8, S12
B6* S3, 6, S7, S8, S12
C* S1, S3, S5, S6, S7, S10, 12, 13 
- denotes standard course 
861 calls (255 bobs, 606 singles)

==3) “In course doubles” Triples - Andrew Johnson – October 2006 / November 2009 (Unrung)==

Building on his Doubles “composition of the decade”, where he produced a very neat in-course 120 of doubles with each row occurring once at each stroke, Andrew Johnson has extended the concept to produce a lovely true triples extent.

The triples principle takes the same notation as the doubles, replacing two “5s” in the notation with “7s”. This thus becomes the first triples principle with 24-change divisions, and very nice it is too.

e.g. 1.3.5.1.3.5.1.3.7.3.5.3.1.3.5.1.3.5.1.3.7.3.1.3

The principle results in an extent in B-blocks, where a B-block is one of these 120 change courses.

5040 Unnamed Triples 
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0
-------------------
- - - - - - - - |
- - - - - - - - |
- - - - - - - |A
- - - - - - - - |
- - - - - - - - |
- - - - - : |
-------------------
5A
- - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - s - -
- - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
- - - - - s - -
- :
-------------------
method = 1.3.5.1.3.5.1.3.7.3.5.3.1.3.5.1.3.5.1.3.7.3.1.3
bob = 5 replacing 7
single = 345 replacing 7

5040 (Different) Unnamed Triples 
2314567 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4
-----------------------------------
2341576 s - - - - - -
6231754 s - - - - - - - - -
4627315 - - - - - - - - - - - -
1563427 - - - - - - - - - -
3154627 - - - - - - - - - - -
5642371 - :
-----------------------------------
7564132 - - - - - - - - - - |
2751643 - - - - - - - - - - - - |
4376251 - - - - - - - - - - |A
6432751 - - - - - - - - - - - |
3725614 - : |
-----------------------------------
2314567 5A
-----------------------------------
method = 3.1.7.3.1.5.3.1.3.1.3.5.3.1.7.3.1.5.3.1.3.5.3.5
bob = 5 replacing 7
single = 34567 replacing 7

In Andrew’s words, “The starts of the second method is chosen so the starts for bells in the plain course is close to Stedman in feel - with quick and slow work. I'm not sure why I chose the starts/rotation of the first - possibly for 46s or 567s in the plain course. 567 singles don't work well as you rapidly run false. The methods are asymmetric so in general you need in-course singles to avoid having to ring methods backwards. If you single in B-blocks then you can have out of course singles (c.f. Grandsire ?)”

Andrew also feels there’s scope for compositional improvement (principally more consecutive plain leads) – watch this space…

==4) 5040 Artistic Triples – Eddie Martin – Rung June 2009==

Eddie’s description of this new pure triples extent tells you all you need to know:

“To be truly artistic, a method along the lines of 'Scientific Triples' really ought to be able to get 5040 in pure triple changes. What is needed is a direct shunt from one lead block to another, without involving any other lead blocks. I’ve looked at various possibilities & the only one that I can find is to substitute two consecutive quick sixes for two consecutive slow ones. (This will work in ‘Quick six Triples except for being two slow in lieu of two quick!) So I looked for something a bit more challenging than ‘quick six triples’ & came up with the following:

Plain = 7.1.7.1.7.3.7.3.7.1.3.1.7.3.7.3.1.3.1.3.7.3.1.3.1.3.7.1.7.1 gives 5671234
x = 7.1.7.1.7.3.7.3.7.1.3.1.7.3.7.1.3.1.3.1.7.1.3.1.3.1.7.1.7.1 gives 5641327" 
5040 Artistic Triples 
1234567 3 5 6
---------------------
6521347 x x x
3512647 x
5641327 x x
--------------
2563147 x x
1536247 x
5243167 x x
--------------
6125437 x x x
4152637 x
1635427 x x
--------------
2164537 x x
5146237 x
3215467 x x x
---------------------
6423157 x x x
1432657 x
4653127 x x
--------------
2461357 x x
3416257 x
4251367 x x
--------------
6324517 x x x
5342617 x
3614527 x x
--------------
2365417 x x
4356217 x
1234567 x x x
----------------------

The composition was rung in hand by the Birmingham band in June 2009, building on their prior achievement of ringing the first peal on Scientific in hand the previous November.

In a development based on Scientific triples on a slightly different tangent, in April 2009 Colin Wyld used Scientific as the starting point for a composition of spliced, adding its reverse (1.7.1.7.1.7.1.5.1.5.1.7.1.7.1.7.1.7.1.5.7.1.7.1.5.1.7.1.3.7, “New Scientific”) into the mix.

Whenever a double (place notation is 347 replacing the final 7ths place) is called there is a change of method and whenever there is a change of method there must be a double. He produced a regular 7-part composition:

S, 2N, 3S, N, 4S, 2N, 5S, N, 2S, 3N (there is a call at the part end so that the next part can start with Scientific)
Part end 5362714

He described things more fully at http://www.bellringers.org/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2009-April/002964.html.

Intriguing, Colin left the Fermat-esque comment at the end of his post,

“…I have produced two more compositions based on combinations of 12 lead, 4 lead, 3 lead and 2 lead splices. I haven't worked out the specific arrangements but there is the potential for 40+ methods.
The second has no calls except changes of method and triple changes throughout. I will submit these when I can get the formatting sorted out”

I am still waiting for these new compositions to appear – they would surely have made this article if published.

==5) 21-part Stedman Triples - Richard Grimmett – November 2004==

Richard generated a list of 13778 compositions of Stedman triples that have a 21-part structure. These can be seen at: http://www.smgcbr.org/ringing/composition/stedman7/21part/sted21coll.htm.

The compositions make use of two similar blocks – one that cyclically rotates through the bells, whilst the other rotates through the rounds -> queens -> tittums transition.

This idea is very nice, and a direct analogue of the 54-part peals of Caters developed by me and Ander Holroyd in early 2003. In fact, looking at Richard’s website, it looks like Brian Price got there with Stedman triples compositions on this plan even earlier. ''(Addition: Richard Grimmett adds that "Andrew Johnson also has one, published in 7-part format in the stedman collection")''

Nevertheless, a nice development. The first composition in Richard’s collection, which has a maximum of 3 consecutive calls, is given as an illustrative example:

5040 Stedman Triples
Contains 351 calls. 231 bobs, 120 singles. 
2314567 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
-------------------------------------
2361574 s - - |
4231576 - s - - |A
7264531 - - |
5216374 s - s - - - |
-------------------------------------
7156342 s s - - |
2716354 - s s - - |B
5742316 - - |
3764152 s - s - - - |
-------------------------------------
7431526 5B
5732461 A
6143572 6B
5647123 A
2314567 6B
-------------------------------------

==6) Innovative original triples – Ander Holroyd (peal attempted 2007)==

Continuing the theme of Dixonoid compositions, Ander Holroyd has a very clever extent of original triples. All bells plain hunt, with a silent handstroke bob (5 in the notation instead of 7) made after bells 1,2 or 3 lead. This gives a course of 210 changes, with a simple extent resulting from ringing the 24 courses of this. The different courses are obtained with omits and doubles (34567) – the only slight shame being a “pure“ triples extent cannot be produced.

5040 Triples 
54 89 1234567
--------------
1 1 7546
D 1327456
2 (1) 4765
--------------
6 part
(1) in parts 1,3,5 only

(See http://www.math.ubc.ca/~holroyd/comps/o7.txt for more)

In November 2009 Alan Burbidge produced an extent he describes as “Variable treble Grandsire triples”. Here, the “calls” reset the notation to the beginning of a lead of Grandsire triples, with a new treble.

Alan has produced both a 10-part and a 7-part composition – as with the Holroyd composition, both of these (and indeed any composition on this plan) need special singles.

Whilst I’m sure it is interesting to ring, I feel this concept feels a bit more contrived and perhaps lacks the clever design framework of the Holroyd approach. I might be missing something.

Alan is currently writing an article for the Ringing World about the composition, and so on request I haven’t reproduced the composition in this article.

==7) Stedman Triples without adjacent calls - Eddie Martin – November 2009==

I think all rung Stedman triples compositions have adjacent calls – clearly with twin-bob and B-block compositions this is a rather fundamental property.

Eddie Martin has produced a very simple 10-part composition that avoids adjacent calls completely. It’s arguably the quickest ever Stedman triples composition to learn. The only drawback in the third type of call used, which disrupts the frontwork:

5040 Stedman Triples 
Each course called 1s 5s 8s 10s 12*
12* = bob if marked ‘-‘ or places 12567 if marked “x”
2314567
- 2461357
- 2156437
- 2635147
x 6534217
x 5431627
-* 5123467
10 part 
Ring x instead of bob marked * in parts 3 and 8

Eddie has produced other examples of compositions without adjacent calls which just have two types of call (though these also have the 12567 call)

==8) Erin Triples - Eddie Martin - June 2006==

A very neat 5-part composition of Erin Triples. Whilst there are exact 5- and 10- part compositions of Erin by Andrew Johnson in Philip Saddleton’s 1999 collection, Eddie’s exudes appeal to me, again due to the elegant regularity of the courses

1234567
----------------------------
3562417 s2 s4 (24 changes)
4356217 A B
2435617 A B
6243517 A B
5624317 A B
4627153 A B*
5123467 A* B
----------------------------
5-part 
A (84 changes) = 3 5 s7 9 11 s14
A*(72 changes) = 1 3 s5 7 9 s12
B (84 changes) = 5 s7 9 s14
B*(72 changes) = 5 s7 9 s12

==9) Stedman triples composition that is symmetric about calls – Philip Saddleton – December 2004==

Another characteristic of Stedman triples (and Stedman at higher stages, but not doubles) is that it is a rare example of method which is not symmetric about the (traditional) calls.

Philip Saddleton countered my assertion with the argument that pairs of bobs give a symmetrical lead. To produce an extent, he joined twin bob courses with calls at the half-six:

5040 Stedman Triples (T Thurstans arr T Brook arr PABS) 
1234567 2 3 4
-----------------
6354127 - - |A
234516 - 2 - |
-----------------
5123467 3A
-----------------
6325417 - - s |B
135246 - 2 - |
-----------------
4-part 
p=3.1.7.3.1.3.1.3.7.1.3.1
b=3.1.5.3.1.3.1.3.5.1.3.1
s=3.1.7.3.1.347.1.3.7.1.3.1

==10) 10080 Triples – (Stedman - Rod Pipe – attempted December 2008; Erin – Philip Saddleton – rung August 2005)==

Rod Pipe has produced a 7-part 10080 of Stedman triples with each row occurring once at handstroke and once at backstroke.

2314567 6352147 S 7615324 - 2174635 - 4725163 1763245 -
3425167 - 3261547 - 6573142 S 1423756 7541236 S 7314652
3451276 S 3215647 - 6534721 1437265 S 7512436 - 7346152 -
4132567 S 2534176 5462317 4712365 – 5274136 - 3671425 S
4125367 - 2547361 5423671 S 4726153 5243761 3612754
1543267 - 5723416 S 4356217 S 7645231 2357416 S 6237145 S
1536472 5734216 - 4362571 S 7652431 - 2374516 - 6271345 -
5617324 7452316 - 3247615 6273514 3421765 2163745 -
5673124 - 7421563 3276451 S 6235714 - 3417256 S 2134657
6351742 S 4176235 2634751 - 2567341 S 4732156 - 1426357 -
6314527 4162753 S 2645317 2574613 4725361 1465273
3462175 1245637 6521473 5421736 7543216 S 4517632
3427651 1256473 S 6514273 - 5417236 - 7532416 - 4576123 S
4736251 - 2614573 - 5467132 4752163 S 5274316 - 5641732 S
4762351 - 2647135 5473621 4726531 5241763 5617423 S
7245613 6723451 4356712 S 7643215 2157463 - 6752134
7256413 - 6734215 S 4367521 S 7632415 - 2174563 - 6723541
2674513 - 7462315 - 3745612 S 6274351 S 1426735 7365241 -
2645731 S 7421653 3751426 6245713 1463257 7354612
6523417 4175236 7132564 2567431 S 4315672 3471526
6534217 - 4152763 S 7125364 - 2573614 4356127 S 3415726 -
5462371 S 1247563 - 1576243 5321746 3641527 - 4537162 S
5427613 1276435 1562743 - 5317246 - 3612475 4576321
4756213 - 2614735 - 5217643 - 3752146 - 6237154 5643712 S
4762531 S 2643157 5276134 S 3721564 S 6271354 - 5637421 S
7243615 6321475 S 2653741 7136245 2163754 - 6754312 S
7236415 - 6317254 2637514 S 7164352 2137645 S 6741523
2674315 - 3762145 S 6725314 - 1473652 - 1726354 S 7162435
2643751 S 3721645 - 6751243 1436752 - 1763254 - 7124653 S
6325417 7136254 S 7162543 - 4617325 S 7315642 1476235 S
6354217 - 7165342 7124635 4673125 - 7354126 1463752
3461572 1573642 - 1476253 S 6341725 - 3471562 S 4315627
3415672 - 1534726 1465732 6312457 3415762 - 4352176
4537126 5412367 4517623 S 3265174 4536127 3247561
4571362 S 5423167 - 4576132 S 3251674 - 4562371 3276415
5143762 - 4356271 5643721 2136547 S 5247613 2634715 -
5136427 4367512 5632417 2164375 5271436 2647351 S
1652374 3745621 S 6254317 - 1423675 - 2153764 6725413
1623574 - 3756412 S 6241573 1437256 2137564 - 6751234
6315274 - 7631524 2167435 4712356 - 1726345 7 part

''(Clarrification: Richard Grimmett point outs that, "The 10,080 of stedman triples by Rod Pipe was composed on 12/06/80". I felt that as the composition hadn't previously been published, and indeed was rung for the first time on 2/12/9 - see http://www.campanophile.co.uk/view.aspx?93313, it qualified it for the scope of the article. Richard subsequently elaborated on the composition, saying "It consists of RWP's No1, and its exact reversal. A part of the original is joined to a part of the reversal by a pair of singles. By joining a part with its reversal you would end up in rounds at the end rather than at a cyclic part-end. But by omitting a pair of sixes with their associated calls (sps) in the reversal the partends are shifted and a full 7 part is realised. Plainly losing 2 sixes per part is not desirable - so in one part alone you single in at the same point an entire plain course (the 7 lots of 2 sixes otherwise missed out)")''

Philip Saddleton also produced a 10080 of bobs-only Erin Triples that was rung in August 2005

10080 Erin Triples 
1234567
-------
4561732 a | |
1365247 b | |
6243517 c |X |
1435267 d | |
6251437 e | |
5432167 c | |
------- |
2165734 a | |A
5361427 b | |
5423176 f | |
4631275 2g | |
5627413 h |Y |
4312576 j | |
3625174 2g | |
4617352 h | |
4512367 k | |
-------
1234567 4A
-------
2154367 Y |B
3451267 X |
-------
1234567 4B
------- 
a = 2.4.5.8.10.11.12 (12)
b = 1.6.8.9.12 (12)
c = 2.4.5.6.7.9 (9)
d = 2.4.5.6.7 (8)
e = 3.4.5.6.8 (8)
f = 5.6.8 (9)
g = 1.3.4.5.6.8 (9)
h = 1.4.5.7.12 (12)
j = 1.2.3.5.8.9.11 (12)
k = 1.2.3 (5)

==See Also==
*[[Compositions of the Decade 1 - Introduction]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 2 - Doubles]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 3 - Minor]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 5 - Major]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 6 - Caters]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 7 - Royal]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 8 - Cinques]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 9 - Maximus]]
[[Category: Composition Reviews]]

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 3 - Minor

2009-12-22T17:32:53Z

Pje24:

__NOTOC__
===A Review by Philip Earis - continued===
Six bell ringing has continued to flourish over the past ten years. It has been a marvellous decade.

The tendency has been towards multi-method peals, and compositions have been longer, leaner and neater than ever before. The liberalisation of the so-called “decisions” - removing the straightjacket of peals needing to consist of mutually true extents – has continued to be a driving force for progress in spliced minor. Building on compositional breakthroughs in the previous decade (where ringing the 41 “regular” surprise minor methods in a peal became considerably easier), the splices between different methods have now been exploited much more fully, and expanded beyond just surprise methods. A potent combination of formidable composers, principally Richard Smith and John Warboys, being chased (and sometimes directed) by a hungry pack of dogs eager to ring as soon as possible the slabs of compositional meat they tossed down, has created a perfect creative storm.

Michael Foulds published his series of books on spliced treble-dodging minor in 2002, and these have acted as a catalyst for some of the compositional advances also. In parallel to this, an entirely new form of splicing minor – “magic blocks” - sprang up at the beginning of the decade, facilitating the simultaneous splicing of over- and under- works together much more efficiently. Consequently, the boundaries of minor ringing have been pushed back, and previously where ringing the 41-spliced brought some closure, now all 147-regular treble-dodging minor (or even all 729 grids) is the new baseline.

Whilst the majority of effort has been directed towards treble-dodging minor methods, there remains much that is going on. Innovative new extents on other plans have resulted, as we shall see. My pick of the bunch are below. As before, I have concentrated primarily (but not exclusively) on new compositions rather than methods.

==1) 147-spliced treble-dodging minor==
*(atw) Richard Smith / John Warboys – April/May 2004
*(non-atw) – John Warboys – First rung July 2005

Richard and John both composed peals of spliced treble-dodging minor in all 147 regular treble-dodging minor methods 2004. The compositions were on a whole-course plan, to achieve all-the-work. John devised a 33-extent version in April 2004, but before this was attempted he tweaked it to produce a 30-extent (ie 21600 change) composition that was rung in May 2004: http://website.lineone.net/~jswcomps/. Richard simultaneously used all the tools in his considerable toolkit to produce a shorter, 29-extent composition that was rung shortly afterwards.

John subsequently produced a “tour-de-force” 10-extent composition (obviously not atw) of the 147 in 2005: http://website.lineone.net/~jswcomps/147_7200.pdf. This was rung first in tower, on 24th July. The band was kept somewhat in the dark about the structure of the composition, as the composer was fearful it might leak out and be rung in hand first. He probably had good reason – following its publication on 25th July, Andrew Tibbetts called a handbell peal of it the very next day.

==2) Magic blocks – Philip Saddleton / Richard Smith / Andrew Tibbetts / David Pipe – December 2003 onwards==

Philip Saddleton conceived the idea for “magic blocks” of minor, whereby the established concept of a 6-lead spliced is extended to every working bell, and for both over- and under- works, to produce extents without calls. Richard Smith explains more fully here: http://www.bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2004-August/000003.html

Philip actually communicated the idea by email to Roger Bailey in December 2000, but Roger’s lack of response left the idea un-tapped until I learnt of it following a chance exchange with Philip a few years later. The idea quickly took off in Cambridge, and the first of many minor peals consisting of magic blocks was rung in December 2003.

The concept was developed to fit in more grids, with contributions from Richard Smith, Andrew Tibbetts and David Pipe. A natural conclusion was fitting all 729 “regular” grids into as short a peal as possible – this was done in 19440 changes in January 2005, followed later that year by a 1053-method peal (incorporating methods with -1256- when the treble dodges in 3-4).

Perhaps the zenith of method-packing efficiency came in August 2004, when Richard Smith produced a 7-extent composition of all 324 grid combinations with -12- when the treble dodges in 3-4. The composition was subsequently rung in January 2007, and can be seen at: http://www.cantabgold.net/users/pje24/324x2x.pdf (there is a typo in the notation for Cambridge)

==3) 3600 Spliced S. Minor (41 methods) – John Warboys – February 2005==

Some ringers regrettably need shorter lengths to tempt them to jump into the minor pool. Even twenty years ago, no-one had even got the standard 41 surprise minor methods into a ten-extent composition, and yet John Warboys has now very neatly managed to fit everything into just 5 extents.

23456 Ke We Li Li
- 23564 Lo
- 45236 Lo We Lo We
- 45362 Li Lo Ke We Co
- 34562 We
- 25346 We Lo Lo We
- 25463 Cu Cu Cu Cu Cu
- 42563 We
- 35426 Ke Lo Co Co
- 35264 Lo
23456 Ct Mo
- 42356 Mo Ct
- 34256 Ch Ch
- 45623 Mu Nb Sa Nb Mu
- 64523 Nw Ak Ak
- 35642 Ch Ch Mu Cl Mu
- 63542 Ak Ak Nw
- 25634 Nb Ch Cl Nb Sa
- 62534 Wh Wo Nb
s 26345 Bv
- 64532 Ip Bv
- 64325 Bv Pr Bk Su Su
- 25364 Nf
- 43256 He Pr He Bk Bk
- 43562 He Hu Pr Nf Nf
- 43625 He Bo
- 56432 Yo Du Yo Du Yo
- 45632 Cm Ip Bo Ip
- 32645 Wm
- 24563 Wk St
- 24635 Wk
- 62435 Wk
- 46235 Ab No Wk
- 46352 Ab Ab
- 34652 Wk No Ab
- 34526 Wk
- 53426 Wk
- 45326 Ro Wk
- 45263 Ab No Wk
- 45632 Ne Bm Ne
- 64532 Wk Bc Wk
- 43256 Ne Bm Ne
- 24356 Wk
- 32456 Ab No No
- 32564 No
- 53264 No Ne St Ne Ro
- 64253 Ws
- 64532 Ws Ws
- 43256 Ad
- 43562 Lf Ab Wm Ab No
- 62543 No No Ne Ad
- 24356 Lf
- 45632 Ad Ab No
- 32645 No Ne Ro Ne
s 23456 
Based on a plan by Peter Ellis
Contains no 65’s at backstroke

==4) 5040 Spliced Treble-Dodging Minor (113m) – John Warboys – First rung January 2004==

This composition achieves packing the highest number of the standard 147 in a 5040-change peal to date.

23456 Ba Sd Ri Pe Ba
- 23564 Fg Ls Wv Cs Ri
s 32645 Pv Wf Os Pv Le
- 45632 Bw Cc Li Le Pm
- 64532 Km Km
- 56432 Kt Wt Kt Sn Km
- 56324 Kt Wt Kt Km Sn
- 56243 Kt Ck Kt
- 64325 Mp Pm By Md Li
- 36425 Bh By Md Co Mp
- 43625 Md Wf Ed Bt Cc
- 25643 Kt
- 62543 Cc Bt
- 35624 Kt Tr Po Sn Kt
- 24635 Bt Kh Os
- 62435 Sn Km Kt Ck Kt
- 62354 Qu Dt Sn Kt
s 34625 Ci Wv Sk Ks Pe
- 34256 Wl Wl
- 34562 Bg Dk Cf Dn Bp
- 53462 Bp Oc Rs Kn Ny
- 45362 Ny Cn Kn
- 23456 
23456 Yo Hu Ol Lv El
- 56423 Ab Ab
- 45623 Wa He Bk Pr He
- 45236 St St Me Ro Ro
- 45362 Hm Br Ab
- 56234 Ns Sl Cw Bc Wr
- 56342 Ol Bm Cb Ng Wi
- 35642 Du
- 35426 Wm Be Wm Lf Lf
- 43526 Bu Ki Wi El Bo
- 54326 Du Du Yo Du
- 63542 Wr Bo
- 63425 Ta Ma Ne Ma Ne
- 46325 Cm Bs Su Bv Su
- 34625 Cr Bo Yo
s 24563 Ct Mo Mo Ct Mo
- 24635 Sh Ml Ev Wo Ml
- 24356 Te
- 63245 Gl Mu Cl Ch Mu
- 26345 Ak Nw Nw Ak Nw
- 32645 Ak Te Fo Fo
- 32456 Te Ti Sa Fo Fo
- 43256 Av
- 43562 Lo We We Lo
- 43625 Ce Va Cd Sw Ce
- 64325 Cu Cu Av Ca Av
- 36425 Lo
- 54362 So We We Lo We
- 35462 Cu Cu Ca Cu
- 24356 Ce Va Cd Ke Sw
s 23456 
All singles are made in 1234.

==5) 5040 Spliced S Minor (21 methods) - Richard Pearce – First rung December 2000==

One criticism sometimes levelled at peals of spliced minor is that methods with the same overwork are often grouped together, which can lead to compositions feeling a bit different from spliced on higher stages.

Richard Pearce had previously shown his mastery of minor composing with an incredibly beautiful 42-spliced 5040 in complete whole courses. This was reproduced in the very first message to [[Ringing Theory]] http://www.bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2004-August/000000.html, but as it was published in 1996 pre-dates the scope of this article.

However, at the very beginning of this decade, Richard composed a notable peal of 21 methods from the Standard 41. It is extremely fluid, with a change of method every lead, but within this there is also a change of overwork at every lead. In Richard’s words, “there are at least half-a-dozen changes from any one backwork to any other backwork”.

Moreover, the composition is all-the-work, and with an exactly equal method balance. Like many of Richard’s compositions, it contains no 65s at backstroke, which some people still seem to aim for.

23456 Co Su Nb
- 23564 Du
- 23645 Ke Bo Ne Bo Ne
- 62345 Li Bv Lf Bv Lf
- 36245 Cl Du Cl Du
- 52364 Ke Bo Ne Bo Ne
- 35264 Su Nb
s 24356 Ws
- 24563 Ch Ws Ch Ws Ch
s 25463 Co Su Nb Su Nb
- 42563 Du
s 24635 Sa Bm Sa Bm
s 42356 Su Co Su Nb Co
s 43256 Sa
s 26435 Du Cl Du
s 53426 Sa
s 46532 Li Bv Lf Bv Lf
s 45632 Sa Bm Sa Bm
s 54326 Cl
s 45263 Ws Ch Ws Ch
s 23456 Ro Bk
- 56423 Wh He Wh He Wh
- 56234 Bk Ro Bk Ro
- 25634 He Wh He Wh He
s 25364 Wo Bc Wo Bc Wo
- 25643 Bc Wo Bc Wo Bc
s 25463 Bk
- 56342 Ro Bk Ro
23456 
23456 Su Nb Co
- 23564 Cl
- 23645 Bo Ne Ke Ne Ke
- 62345 Bv Lf Li Lf Li
- 36245 Du Cl Du Cl
- 52364 Bo Ne Ke Ne Ke
- 35264 Nb Co
s 24356 Ch
- 24563 Ws Ch Ws Ch Ws
s 25463 Su Nb Co Nb Co
- 42563 Cl
s 24635 Bm Sa Bm Sa Bm
s 26435 Cl Du Cl
s 53426 Bm
s 46532 Bv Lf Li Lf Li
s 45632 Bm Sa Bm Sa
s 54326 Du
s 45263 Ch Ws Ch Ws
s 23456 Bk Ro
- 56423 He Wh He Wh He
- 56234 Ro Bk Ro Bk
- 25634 Wh He Wh He Wh
s 25364 Bc Wo Bc Wo Bc
- 25643 Wo Bc Wo Bc Wo
s 25463 Ro
- 56342 Bk Ro Bk
23456 
23456 Nb Co Su
- 23564 Li Bv Li
- 23645 Ne Ke Bo Ke Bo
- 62345 Lf Li Bv Li Bv
- 36245 Lf Bv
- 52364 Ne Ke Bo Ke Bo
- 35264 Co Su
23456 
Singles are 1234 in 2nds place methods and 1456 in 6ths place methods.

==6) MUG minor – Ander Holroyd – First rung November 2004==

MUG is a simple 8-change principle (&34.2.34-, 1), with pairs of bells working together in 1-2, 3-4 and 5-6 for a division before hunting on.

Finding a set of mutually true leads is easy, but joining them together to produce an extent had proved extremely difficult. Since at least the early 1970s, composers had struggled to get a recognisably extent from the method. Graham John in particular had exhausted his patience with this. Following a long discussion on this list in the autumn of 2004, Ander Holroyd managed to put together the following:

720 MUG minor
% 2 4% 5 6 123456
-----------------------
s - 154263
s - 324615
- - 451236
-----------------------
5 part
hls = 345
bob = 4

==7) Mersey Ferry treble jump minor – Ander Holroyd – First rung June 2003==

From the sublime to the ridiculous, Mersey Ferry is the first method with no treble-fixed falseness. The treble jumps, so that it rings only once in each position in the lead, meaning that obtaining a composition for an extent trivially requires ringing every possible lead.

(13)4.(35)-(64)3.(42)- 
123456
------
231465
324615
236451
326145
312654
136245
------ 
1 2 3 2345
s s s 3524
s s 5342
s 4352
s (s)3425 
6 part, omitting (s) in parts 3 and 6
Single = 56 as treble hunts 2-1

==8) Out-of-course splicing – Richard Smith – Composed September 2004==

Richard turned his mathematical skills to analysing singles in treble-dodging minor, and generated lists of methods which splice out of course, with the results documented at http://www.bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2004-September/000175.html.

The technique had been used previously in examples by Glen Taylor, Roger Bailey and others, but Richard’s thorough and rigorous approach produced a gem of a spliced Kent and Oxford composition, exploiting the fact the two methods are out-of-course lead splices:

123456 Kt Kt
s 164253 Ox
s 126435 Kt Kt
s 154236 Ox Ox
s 162534 Kt Kt Kt
------
134256 
s = 1456
Twice repeated.

Other interesting compositions also resulted, including using out-of-course 3-lead splices:

720 Spliced Surprise Minor (4m) 
123456 Yo
s 132456 Lo Yo = York S
s 146532 Yo Yo Yo Du Du = Durham S
s 152346 We Lo = London S
s 136452 Yo Du We = Wells S
s 156324 We
------
s 134256 
s = 1236
Twice repeated

==9) Minor principles (plain course generates extent) – Chris Munday – published August 2006==

Chris Munday has published an exhaustive list of 'perfect' 6-part principle extents of minor (ie a plain course with 120 rows per lead which generates the extent), which have no more than two consecutive blows, and consist only of the changes x, 12, 14, 16, 34 and 36.

There are 141,235 such examples – none have ever been rung or to the best of my knowledge previously published. The methods can be seen at: <http://www.rrhorton.net/minor_principles.html>, and would be a significant challenge to ring.

==10) Variable treble extents based on the Hudson group – Richard Smith – First rung January 2004==

Hudson's Group is a group of order 60 that is generated by the changes 12, 16, 34. It can be used to construct interesting variable treble extents. Richard explained the theory here: http://www.bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2004-September/000110.html

Perhaps the most interesting method produced is Hudson Delight Minor (&3-3.4-2-1.4-4.5,2), which is London over the treble. The extent is simply 5*(spppps), where a single is 34. Further examples of Hudson methods can be seen here: http://www.cantabgold.net/users/pje24/hudson7.pdf

Interesting, a variable-treble extent can be achieved with precisely one “regular” treble-dodging major method – Disley Delight – as documented by Jonathan Deane in 1991. Mike Ovenden wrote an interesting deconstruction of this at: http://www.bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2005-December/001221.html

==11) Pseudo-double Dixon's Bob Minor – Philip Saddleton - Published 2002==

The extent of Dixon’s Bob minor dates from the mid 19th century. In Dixon’s, all bell plain hunt, with 2nds being made when the treble leads, and 4ths being made when bells 2 or 4 lead. The concept can be expanded to produce a very tricky and yet elegant extent. If at alternate backstrokes, Dixon's Bob minor rules and reverse Dixon's Bob Minor rules (ie 3rds made if bells 3 or 5 are lying, and 5ths under the treble) are applied, an extent can be obtained.

720 Pseudo-Double Dixon's Bob Minor
P A B Saddleton 
23456
- 35462 4
- 43562 1
- 52346 1
- 35246 1
- 45632 2
- 64532 3
- 56432 4
- 45326 4
- 52634 1
- 65234 4
- 23546 1
- 62543 3
p 23456

The figures shown refer only to changes where the treble leads in the Dixon's section, not the reverse Dixon's section. All bobs are 14.

==12) John Warboys SU0713 which contains the 41 Surprise Minor in regular 3 part blocks of 720 changes==

After prompting by Ian Fielding, two more entries were added:-

5040 Spliced S. Minor (41 methods) SU0713 
23456 Du ) Repeat twice, calling He
- 23564 Cm Pr Bo Nf Nf ) for Bk in 2nd part, giving
- 64523 Du Hu Bk Bo ) 23456
- 42356 ) 
23456 Bo Ip Ip ) Repeat twice, calling Bv
- 23564 Yo Su Yo ) for Su in 2nd part, and
- 45236 Bo Bo ) calling single at end,
- 45362 Bo Du ) giving 24356
34256 ) 
24356 Mo Wo )
- 24563 Wo Wh Nb Cl Cl ) Repeat twice, giving 24356
- 63524 Wo Nw Ch )
- 32456 ) 
24356 Nb )
- 45632 Wo Ak Mu Ct Sa ) Repeat twice, calling Ch
- 32645 Sa ) for Mu in 2nd part, giving
- 56324 Wh Ak Sa ) 24356
43256 ) 
24356 Cu ) Repeat twice, calling Co
- 24563 Lo ) for Li in 2nd part, and
- 35246 Li Cu Cu Co ) calling single at end,
- 35462 Ke Lo We Ke ) giving 23456
43256 ) 
23456 Lf )
- 35642 Ws Lf Bm )
- 54263 No ) Repeat twice, calling Ad
- 25463 Ab Wk Bc ) for Ws in 2nd part, giving
- 42563 Ab ) 23456
- 63542 Ro St )
42356 ) 
23456 Bc )
- 64235 Wk ) Repeat twice, giving 23456
- 26435 Wm Bm Ne Ad )
- 42635 Bc No Bm )
- 42356 ) 

Alternative (1) for Norwich-over blocks: SU0714

23456 Ro Ab Ro Bc )
- 56423 Bc ) Repeat twice, giving 23456
34256 ) 
23456 Bc )
- 64235 Wk Ne Bm Lf Ws ) Repeat twice, calling Ws
- 52643 No Wk ) for Ad in 2nd part, giving
- 36524 Wm Ad Ne Bc No ) 23456
- 45362 Bc St )
34256 )

Alternative (2) for Norwich-over blocks: SU0715

23456 Bm )
- 64235 Wk )
- 26435 Bm Ne ) Repeat twice, giving 23456
- 63542 Wk No )
- 25634 Ad Lf )
- 34625 Wm Bm )
42356 ) 
23456 Ro Ab Ro
- 42356 Lf
- 25634 Bm Ab No
- 25346 Ne Bm Wm Ws
- 32546 Bc Bc
- 24653 Ws
- 24536 Bm
- 65243 Bm Ne
- 54326 No Bc St Ab
- 54263 No
- 25463 Ne Bm Lf
- 34256 Lf Bm
- 34562 Ws St
- 62534 Lf
- 23456
Compositions SU0713 and SU0714 are entirely 3-part callings with single-lead substitutions of lead splicers to ensure a plain lead of every method. All three versions contain no 65's at backstroke.
==13) Peter Ellis whole course 21 Surprise Minor (atw) with bobs only and a change of backwork every course (November 2005)==
14 or 21 SPLICED SURPRISE MINOR in whole courses 
14 methods: call Part I or III three times.
21 methods: call Part I once and Part III twice, or Part I twice and Part III once as shown below. 
PART I
123456
Warkworth -123564
Carlisle -152364
London -135264
Berwick -135642
Morpeth -135426
Bacup -135264
Cunecastre -123564
Primrose -123645
Westminster -162345
York -136245
Lightfoot -123645
Whitley -123456
Cambridge -142356
Chester -134256 
PART I
134256
Warkworth -134562
Carlisle -153462
London -145362
Berwick -145623
Morpeth -145236
Bacup -145362
Cunecastre -134562
Primrose -134625
Westminster -163425
York -146325
Lightfoot -134625
Whitley -134256
Cambridge -123456
Chester -142356 
PART III
142356
Warkworth -142563
Northumberland -154263
London -125463
Hexham -125634
Morpeth -125346
Bacup -125463
Cunecastre -142563
Norfolk -142635
Allendale -164235
York -126435
Netherseale -142635
Whitley -142356
Ipswich -134256
Munden -123456

==See Also==
*[[Compositions of the Decade 1 - Introduction]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 2 - Doubles]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 4 - Triples]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 5 - Major]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 6 - Caters]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 7 - Royal]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 8 - Cinques]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 9 - Maximus]]
[[Category: Composition Reviews]]

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 9 - Maximus

2009-12-22T17:32:09Z

Pje24:

__NOTOC__
===A Review by Philip Earis - continued===
12-bell ringing has enjoyed a strong decade. Single-method ringing has continued its advance towards better methods and better compositions, but the developments – although significant – have often felt more like evolution than revolution. With spliced maximus, though, a real step change for the better has taken place.

===Bristol cream===
Turning first to single methods, the decade has seen a pleasant trend to more coursing-dominated (ie more musical) methods. Towerbell peals of Bristol over the decade are up 14% to 572, with Bristol becoming the most rung single maximus method for the first time. This is a very welcome development, and a tangible sign of ringing progress. Conductors have responded accordingly, with a plethora of delightful Bristol compositions, almost universally incorporating considerable little-bell music.

In a demonstration that continual evolution leads to revolution, anecdotally it seems that very few poor Bristol Maximus compositions are rung. I don’t have statistics, but would strongly suspect that at least 90% of rung Bristol Maximus compositions date from the 1990s and present decade.

Towerbell peals of Yorkshire are up 11% to 471, whilst Cambridge is down 5% to 520. If these trends continue, Yorkshire will overtake Cambridge in the coming decade.

===Out with the old, in with the new…===
At the dodgy-method part of the spectrum (and sadly it’s a big part), it is of some comfort to see peal numbers in some “nasties” decline. The usual pantomime villain duo of Lyddington and Belvoir have happily dropped off a cliff, with two and one peals rung dis-respectively. The trio of mediocre London-over methods Newgate, Barford and Lyddington have seen a collective 56% drop to 34, whilst peals of Pudsey have had a similar decline.

There have been a significant number of new methods rung for the first time, many of them rather nice. Interestingly, the good methods have sometimes resulted from new spliced compositions.

===Spliced surprises===
Indeed, it’s with spliced peals that the statistics become perhaps most striking. Now the total number of towerbell peals of spliced maximus over the decade seems pretty constant at around 340. However, what has been rung in peals of spliced has changed dramatically.

In the 1990s, 88% of towerbell peals of spliced maximus were in just spliced treble-dodging methods (and most of these just spliced surprise). However, in the 2000s that proportion falls considerably, to around 61%. The number of peals of “mixed” spliced rung (incorporating different treble paths, and so on) is up 187%, and provides some evidence that composers are using the best methods for the job much more frequently, rather than sticking to tired conventions.

Big advances in spliced composition – led by David Pipe – have driven this transition. A simultaneous boost has been given by the early adoption and active commissioning of new ideas by Tony Kench and his peal band. Cyclic compositions, including 12-parts, have become widespread. New musical concepts, including the mega-tittums coursing effect, have also been developed.

===Some much done, how much left to do?===
Composing spliced maximus involves a vast search space, meaning predominantly manual input and logic is required for the best results. Computers have played a large part in the much more constrained search spaces of tenors-together single method peals, though, again with SMC32 leading the way.

Indeed, the nine and a bit courses of tenors-together maximus is sufficiently small that David Hull published complete composition collections for methods like Cambridge over the decade. If people want to do new things here, they’ll have to broaden their horizons.

It will certainly be very interesting to see how maximus ringing develops. Perhaps discrete blocks of changes, each giving a different musical effect, might be the way forward. We shall see…

==1) Classic cyclic 11- and 12-parts using a link method approach – David Pipe – (November 1999 / September 2000 / August 2001)==
I’ve selected the “Pipe Classic” 11-part here in view of its considerable influence on the decade’s ringing and subsequent compositions. Whilst admittedly it was first rung on handbells just before the decade’s start, the first tower-bell performance was in August 2001.

As with David’s (later) analogous royal peals, the basic idea is a cyclic 11-part construction to deliver both continuous run music and the all-the-work property. The composition has no calls – the link method Slinky is used to move the bells between cyclic parts.

The main block of the composition has the 2nd and the tenor of that cyclic part (so bells 5 and 6 in the first part) alternately ringing “pivot leads”, ie the leads where they are the pivot bell. The consequent palindromic structure is both very elegant, includes all available leads in the part, and provides a super balance of forward and reverse runs in each part.

The methods used are very well-chosen: a mix between the established Ariel, Zanussi and Maypole (concentrated Bristol), and the newly-designed Phobos and Deimos, both of which deliver blockbuster leads in the composition.

Phobos is a tidy l-group method with two fishtails either side of the leadend, and plain hunt on the front six around the half-lead. The music flows well, and includes complete wraps of reverse rounds.

Deimos is the real music-box regular method of the decade in its application here. It is one of a very small number of good methods on more than six bells that has 3rds made at the half-lead (normally the kiss of death). However, by skilful use of successive plain hunting on three at different places in the row, and adding dodges whenever there are runs, marvellous wall-to-wall music is delivered throughout the chosen leads.

5016 Spliced Maximus (6m)
234567890ET Slinky Little Treble Place
4523ET90786 Deimos Alliance
534T20E8967 Phobos Surprise
24E5937T608 Maypole Alliance
3T504826E79 Ariel Surprise
E29475638T0 Zanussi Surprise
T038564729E Zanussi Surprise
9E72648503T Ariel Surprise
08T637594E2 Maypole Alliance
796E8204T53 Phobos Surprise
8607T93E524 Deimos Alliance
67890ET2345
11-part

The decade saw many variations on this plan, which are nicely chronicled on Roddy Horton’s website: [http://rrhorton.net/arkcyclic.html]

The Pipe Classic composition has methods with odd-numbered pivot bells (3 in Deimos, 5 in Maypole, 7 in Zanussi, 9 in Ariel, 11 in Phobos). As an example of a later variation, John Warboys produced a composition in “red” methods on a very similar plan, but where the methods had even-numbered pivot bells instead.

Of course, with a cyclic construction there’s a strong case to be made for all 12 bells to be involved in the runs, rather than a fixed treble creating an artificial musical “block” that disrupts the runs.

As such, David soon developed a 12-part composition on a similar plan. Being a regular double method, the plain lead of Bristol / Maypole in the 11-part structure contains the row eg 234567890ET1 when the 2nd of the part is pivoting. As all other cyclic rotations of this row occur in different parts, and rounds itself is a cyclic rotation of this row, Bristol needs to be replaced with a different method to preserve truth. Here Glazgow Little Surprise is used:

5040 Spliced Maximus (6m)
1234567890ET
Lynx Diff 64523T10E897
Deimos A 653412ET9078
Phobos S 624T503817E9
Glazgow LS 6315E4927T80
Ariel S 6T204857391E
Zanussi S 61E39574820T
Zanussi S 60T827495E31
Ariel S 6E91738504T2
Glazgow LS 6807T92E4153
Phobos S 697E8103T524
Deimos A 67890ET12345
12-part. 1152 Ariel, Phobos, Zanussi S; 864 Deimos A; 576 Glazgow LS; 144 Lynx Differential. 119 com, atw for all 12 bells.

==2) The Rise of Mega-tittums – Philip Earis, David Pipe, Philip Saddleton, Rob Lee et al – February 2006==
The possibilities given by all consecutive bells coursing have already been mentioned in the royal article. Suffice to say, the effect becomes better and more pronounced the more bells there are.

I think I first wrote about the possibilities in this February 2006 message to this list: [http://www.bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2006-February/001292.html]

There was quick collaborative progress at developing the concept, developing ways of getting from rounds into all consecutive bells coursing as quickly and elegantly as possible.

David Pipe soon realised that a sequence of different bobs in the same position could be used for this. A 10ths place bob 'out' turns the coursing order from the plain course 324 to the tittums style 432. This effect is repeated with appropriate bobs every course until mega-tittums is obtained. The effect is then reversed with the inverse bobs in the second half:

3984 Bristol Maximus
O I 234567890ET
10 342567890ET
18 453627890ET
16 564738290ET
14 675849302ET
14 2345T6E7089
16 234567T8E90
18 23456789T0E
10 234567890ET
The figures refer to the type of bob. O is an 'out' for the tenor, I is an 'in' for the 2nd. Ideal for handbells - all pairs are either in their home position or coursing.

Philip Saddleton claimed independent discovery of this, but expanded the concept to a peal length by combining this structure with a cyclic 11-part plan. This can be very easily achieved by having a single lead of the method in the mega-tittums coursing order before reversing the transpositions:

33440 Maypole Alliance (or 6072 Crayford Little Bob)
0 1ET907856423
8 1ET907862534
6 1ET908273645
4 1ET029384756
4 1890E7T62534
6 1890ET273645
8 1890ET234756
0 1890ET234567
11-part

Rob Lee recognised that mx methods could be useful in the transition between tittums / cyclic courses, and put together a prototype composition:

5104 Spliced Maximus (4m)
234567890ET Br
795E3T20486 Br
T0E89674523 Av
14 ET089674523 Or
16 0E9T8674523 Av
18 908E7T64523 Or
10 89706E5T423 Br
10 ET029384567 Av
18 0E9T8234567 Li
16 908ET234567 Or
14 890ET234567
11 part.
584 Avon D., Bristol S., Orion S., 352 Littleport Little S., 98 com, atw

I further incorporated similar ideas in spliced maximus compositions using Pipe 11-part plans, but the real crowning glory of such a fusion would take a number of month’s further development…

==3) “Jupiter” cyclic spliced 12-part on a mega-tittums plan – David Pipe – November 2007==
The aim of this composition was to combine the cyclic runs character of the Classic 11- and 12-parts with some mega-tittums music where all consecutive bells are coursing. A 12-part structure is good because it naturally supports both the cyclic runs and the mega-tittums music.

The first half of each part is aimed at generating runs, whilst the second part efficiently gets to the mega-tittums coursing order, has a principle to exploit this and simultaneously switch to another part, and then reverses the bobs to get back to the part end.

The beauty of this composition is that both these halves have wonderful custom-designed features – features which may not be immediately apparent.

1234567890ET
Io LA 142638507T9E
Chaldene LA 13527496E8T0
Leda LA 1648203T5E79
Callisto LA 157392E4T608
Europa LTP 18604T2E3957
Europa LTP 1795E3T20486
Callisto LA 108T6E492735
Leda LA 19E7T5038264
Chaldene LA 1T0E89674523
Io LA 10 bob 1ET907856423
Plain B 18 bob 1ET907862534
Plain B 16 bob 1ET908273645
Amalthea LA 14 bob 1ET029384756
Amalthea LA 1T2E30495867
Ganymede Diff 12 bob 8907E6T54123
Amalthea LA 14 bob 890ET7162534
Amalthea LA 16 bob 890ET1273645
Plain B 18 bob 890ET1234756
Plain B 10 bob 890ET1234567
12-part

As far as I know, in all previous 12-part maximus compositions the methods used were pretty conventional, ie they weren’t designed for the treble to be involved in the runs as much as possible. The result can be more artificial musical “disruptive breaks” where the treble of the part breaks up runs of other bells.

Here, however, the methods in the “runny” first half were tailor-made (with a consequent variety of treble paths) to bring out maximal music in all 12 parts, involving the treble in the runs.

In the mega-tittums second half, an intrinsic problem of the 12-part structure is that the mega-tittums coursing order is the same in each of the parts, leading to potential falseness problems.

David got round this problem by choosing methods which perhaps counter-intuitively give some runs-style music in the mega-tittums coursing order. The principle chosen here is Ganymede, which has elegant mirror symmetry as well as conventional palindromic symmetry.

The real crowning glory, though, is the use of Amalthea. Whilst this is a conventional a-group method, it is not really designed to be rung in its plain course; rather, it elegantly gives some really super runs music in the mega-tittums coursing order. The music is generates is wonderfully plentiful, but also incredibly unexpected. Runs of different types, both forward and backwards, frequently just pop out of the ether. The total effect is magical.

The composition is described more fully (including figures for the leads of Amalthea) in this November 2007 message [http://www.bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2007-November/001840.html]

==4) Single Surprise Maximus (b group)==
*5042 Cambridge - David Hull
*5040 Yorkshire - Mark Davies

The decade saw further incremental progress with single-method peals, continuing the leap in attitudes started in the 1990s, and mirroring the developments in Royal compositions that have already been discussed.

Little bells runs continued to be at the fore, and happily misguided ideas such as that all compositions need to contain three whole courses of 65s seem to have been pretty well banished. Calls at 9ths are no longer a novelty, and calls in other places are becoming more commonplace.

Big bobs are around, and look to be here to stay. This is especially relevant for tenors-together b-group methods like Cambridge and Yorkshire, where the conventional length of 5042 almost invariably sees the peal have a big “duffer” section at the end.

The two b-group compositions I’ve selected are both on slightly shaky date ground for inclusion, as they were both in fact first rung in the second half of 1999 (though to other methods, I believe)

David Hull’s Cambridge has a lovely 2-part format, great use of the calls at 9ths (and potentially 8ths), and also well illustrates the musical sacrifices that must be made at the end of a composition to produce a 5042 on the usual plan:

5042 Cambridge Surprise Maximus (#4)
Composed by: David G Hull
2345678 9 M W 8 H
54362 S S S
24365 SS S SS
63452 S S SS S
34256 SS S 2
52436 S S
(32456) S
Omit 1 SS.

Mark Davies’ composition, which he calls "The Cosmic Joker", has the very attractive property that every full course contains both little-bell music and 56/65 rollups:

5088 Yorkshire Surprise Maximus
Mark B Davies
23456 B M W H
45236 - -
54362 x s
23465 s s
43652 s 2 -
43526 x -
64523 x - -
35426 - ss -
23456 -
x = 18
Includes 83 LB5, 165 LB4, 14 567890ET and 10 657890ET

==5) Single Surprise Maximus – Bristol==
*5090 #4 – David Hull, October 2003
*5088 – James Holdsworth, September 2008
*5040 #3 – Mark Davies, January 2005

Bristol is a glorious method at all stages. Unlike something like Yorkshire, though, Bristol’s different leadhead groups at different stages mean than very different strategies need to be used on different numbers of bells to get the most of the method.

Happily Bristol Maximus doesn’t have the same intrinsic problem as b-group methods, in that a nice and musical snap finish can be achieved without much difficulty. There are literally hundreds of good tenors-together compositions to choose from here, by many composers – a nice illustrative example would be David Hull’s 5090 #4:

5090 Bristol Maximus (#4)
23456 M W H
64352 - -
45362 2
32564 - S
64523 S -
43526 - 2
(42536) SB

That said, the method is very flexible. A snap finish isn’t needed or necessarily desirable, and indeed great compositions can even exist in 2-part format.

I was very attracted to the neat simple 2-part James Holdsworth composition that employs whole courses to great effect. However, the accolades have to be reduced somewhat when you realise that DJP produced something very similar in the previous decade. Why neither of these appears in the RW diary would be a mystery if the diary’s selection criteria involved compositions having notable merit.

5088 Bristol Surprise Maximus
J W Holdsworth
23456 M 9 W H
----------------------
64352 - -
56342 -
54362 -s
24365 s
----------------------
Repeat

5088 Bristol Surprise Maximus
DJP
23456 M W H
---------------
64352 1 1
56342 1
24365 s 2*
---------------
2 part. 2*=sb.

For a further example of a composition full of little-bell music, with snappy transitions between sections and limited exposure to duffer courses, the Mark Davies composition below also shows the high bar that tenors together compositions have met:

5040 Bristol Surprise Maximus (#3)
23456 M H W
(53426) s
54326 s
56423 2 -
24365 - -
(36452) - - 2
64352 2
23456 s s
Contains 8 567890ET, 102 LB5, 213 LB4

==6) Tenors-together spliced Treble Dodging Maximus (RABS)==
*Alex Byrne – January 2008
*John Warboys – September 2009

Despite the cyclic developments of the decade, tenors-together spliced in “legacy” methods continues to be rung and developed. There have recently been two simple and very elegant compositions in the four “RABS” methods, Rigel, Avon, Bristol and Strathclyde.

Both are all-the-work, and manage to achieve this using musical courses (sometimes whole courses) throughout the compositions.

Alex Byrne’s composition is a lovely palindrome, whilst John Warboys’ uses a two-part structure. Both are well worth closer inspection.

5184 Spliced TD Maximus (4 methods)
Alex Byrne
M W H
- RRRRRR.
- AAAAAAAAAAA.BBBBBBB
2 - BBB.SAARAAS.SSSSSSSSSSS.
- - - R.RRRRR.R.
2 RBBBB.BBBBR.
- - - RRRRR.R.
2 SSSSSSSSSSS.SAARAAS.BBBBBBB
- - BBB.AAAAAAAAAAA.

5088 Spliced TD Maximus (4 methods)
John Warboys
23456 M W H
43526 2 1 AAAAAAAAAAA-SAB-BRS-
25634 1 1 R-BBASSARSS-A
46532 1 1 SRB-RRRRRRRRRRR-
24365 2 1 2 BRRA-A-RB-SRB-A-
34625 2 1 BBBBBBBBBBB-SAB-BRS-
26543 1 1 R-BBASSARSS-A
35642 1 1 SRB-SSSSSSSSSSS-
23456 2 1 2 BRRA-A-RB-SRB-A-
1296 B,R,S; 1200 A. 53 com; atw.
The full courses of R and S can be swapped if desired.

==7) “Winking up” – Ander Holroyd / Adam Shepherd – August 2000==

“Winking up” is a great concept that was briefly visited at the beginning of the decade. There hasn’t been much investigation since, but I’m convinced there could be tantalising possibilities here.

In short, “winking up” is a way of extending a method on n bells to a method on 2n bells. So far example what bell number 3 does in a minor method defines what bells 5 and 6 do in the related winked up maximus method.

This doubling lends itself to winked up methods being rung on handbells, but there’s no reason why this has to be the case.

The classic winking “algorithm” is that:

*If on the lower stage a bell makes a place, then on the winked up higher stage, the corresponding pair of bells will do a double dodge together.
*If on the lower stage a bell hunts, then on the winked up higher stage the corresponding pair of bells will ring four changes of plain hunt on four.

The practical consequence is that to wink up from minor to maximus, the following place notations map:

Minor Winked Up Maximus
- -4589-4589
14 -369-369
36 -470-470
12 -589-589
etc

This notation may not look the most elegant, but the effect can be really excellent. Pairs of bells stay together, hunting around the change like a double act.

There has been one winked up peal rung, Wee Willie Winkie Hybrid Maximus – a winked up London Minor – was rung in 2000, and this contained 1680 runs of 4 or more consecutive bells:

5184 Wee Willie Winkie Hybrid Maximus
Arranged Adam P. Shepherd
34567890ET
----------
- 09TE784365 2
- 567890ET43 1
- 34906587ET 1
- 349078TE65 4
p 87345609TE 1
----------
6 part
Bob = 369-369 for final 589-589

Wee Willie Winkie Hybrid Maximus:
-470-470-4589-4589-470-470-369-369-4589-4589-234589-589-4589-4589-45670-470-36789-369-4589-4589-369-369-470-470-36789-369-4589-4589-369-369-470-470-4589-4589-589-589-4589-4589-369-369-470-470-4589-4589-470-470-589-589 (lh 128734TE6590)

Further applications can be found, I am sure. At the least, such ringing would make an interesting and very different-sounding block inserted into in a more conventional peal composition. The possibilities could be considerable – winking up cyclic methods, or tittums coursing orders, maybe. Or perhaps winky effects could be used with non-adjacent bells.

Of course, it’s not just six bell methods that can be winked up. I have vague recollections of ringing winked up Banana Doubles to create a fruity 10 bell method, as well as the memorable experience of winking up twice plain hunt on three, so it turned into a 12-bell method (the double winking was conceptually a bit tricky, at least at first, except for PABS).

There’s mileage in Shipping Forecast Singles yet…

==See Also==
*[[Compositions of the Decade 1 - Introduction]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 2 - Doubles]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 3 - Minor]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 4 - Triples]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 5 - Major]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 6 - Caters]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 7 - Royal]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 8 - Cinques]]
[[Category: Composition Reviews]]

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 9 - Maximus

2009-12-22T17:25:00Z

Pje24: Created page with '__NOTOC__ ===A Review by Philip Earis - continued=== 12-bell ringing has enjoyed a strong decade. Single-method ringing has continued its advance towards better methods and bette…'

__NOTOC__
===A Review by Philip Earis - continued===
12-bell ringing has enjoyed a strong decade. Single-method ringing has continued its advance towards better methods and better compositions, but the developments – although significant – have often felt more like evolution than revolution. With spliced maximus, though, a real step change for the better has taken place.

===Bristol cream===
Turning first to single methods, the decade has seen a pleasant trend to more coursing-dominated (ie more musical) methods. Towerbell peals of Bristol over the decade are up 14% to 572, with Bristol becoming the most rung single maximus method for the first time. This is a very welcome development, and a tangible sign of ringing progress. Conductors have responded accordingly, with a plethora of delightful Bristol compositions, almost universally incorporating considerable little-bell music.

In a demonstration that continual evolution leads to revolution, anecdotally it seems that very few poor Bristol Maximus compositions are rung. I don’t have statistics, but would strongly suspect that at least 90% of rung Bristol Maximus compositions date from the 1990s and present decade.

Towerbell peals of Yorkshire are up 11% to 471, whilst Cambridge is down 5% to 520. If these trends continue, Yorkshire will overtake Cambridge in the coming decade.

===Out with the old, in with the new…===
At the dodgy-method part of the spectrum (and sadly it’s a big part), it is of some comfort to see peal numbers in some “nasties” decline. The usual pantomime villain duo of Lyddington and Belvoir have happily dropped off a cliff, with two and one peals rung dis-respectively. The trio of mediocre London-over methods Newgate, Barford and Lyddington have seen a collective 56% drop to 34, whilst peals of Pudsey have had a similar decline.

There have been a significant number of new methods rung for the first time, many of them rather nice. Interestingly, the good methods have sometimes resulted from new spliced compositions.

===Spliced surprises===
Indeed, it’s with spliced peals that the statistics become perhaps most striking. Now the total number of towerbell peals of spliced maximus over the decade seems pretty constant at around 340. However, what has been rung in peals of spliced has changed dramatically.

In the 1990s, 88% of towerbell peals of spliced maximus were in just spliced treble-dodging methods (and most of these just spliced surprise). However, in the 2000s that proportion falls considerably, to around 61%. The number of peals of “mixed” spliced rung (incorporating different treble paths, and so on) is up 187%, and provides some evidence that composers are using the best methods for the job much more frequently, rather than sticking to tired conventions.

Big advances in spliced composition – led by David Pipe – have driven this transition. A simultaneous boost has been given by the early adoption and active commissioning of new ideas by Tony Kench and his peal band. Cyclic compositions, including 12-parts, have become widespread. New musical concepts, including the mega-tittums coursing effect, have also been developed.

===Some much done, how much left to do?===
Composing spliced maximus involves a vast search space, meaning predominantly manual input and logic is required for the best results. Computers have played a large part in the much more constrained search spaces of tenors-together single method peals, though, again with SMC32 leading the way.

Indeed, the nine and a bit courses of tenors-together maximus is sufficiently small that David Hull published complete composition collections for methods like Cambridge over the decade. If people want to do new things here, they’ll have to broaden their horizons.

It will certainly be very interesting to see how maximus ringing develops. Perhaps discrete blocks of changes, each giving a different musical effect, might be the way forward. We shall see…

==1) Classic cyclic 11- and 12-parts using a link method approach – David Pipe – (November 1999 / September 2000 / August 2001)==
I’ve selected the “Pipe Classic” 11-part here in view of its considerable influence on the decade’s ringing and subsequent compositions. Whilst admittedly it was first rung on handbells just before the decade’s start, the first tower-bell performance was in August 2001.

As with David’s (later) analogous royal peals, the basic idea is a cyclic 11-part construction to deliver both continuous run music and the all-the-work property. The composition has no calls – the link method Slinky is used to move the bells between cyclic parts.

The main block of the composition has the 2nd and the tenor of that cyclic part (so bells 5 and 6 in the first part) alternately ringing “pivot leads”, ie the leads where they are the pivot bell. The consequent palindromic structure is both very elegant, includes all available leads in the part, and provides a super balance of forward and reverse runs in each part.

The methods used are very well-chosen: a mix between the established Ariel, Zanussi and Maypole (concentrated Bristol), and the newly-designed Phobos and Deimos, both of which deliver blockbuster leads in the composition.

Phobos is a tidy l-group method with two fishtails either side of the leadend, and plain hunt on the front six around the half-lead. The music flows well, and includes complete wraps of reverse rounds.

Deimos is the real music-box regular method of the decade in its application here. It is one of a very small number of good methods on more than six bells that has 3rds made at the half-lead (normally the kiss of death). However, by skilful use of successive plain hunting on three at different places in the row, and adding dodges whenever there are runs, marvellous wall-to-wall music is delivered throughout the chosen leads.

5016 Spliced Maximus (6m)
234567890ET Slinky Little Treble Place
4523ET90786 Deimos Alliance
534T20E8967 Phobos Surprise
24E5937T608 Maypole Alliance
3T504826E79 Ariel Surprise
E29475638T0 Zanussi Surprise
T038564729E Zanussi Surprise
9E72648503T Ariel Surprise
08T637594E2 Maypole Alliance
796E8204T53 Phobos Surprise
8607T93E524 Deimos Alliance
67890ET2345
11-part

The decade saw many variations on this plan, which are nicely chronicled on Roddy Horton’s website: [http://rrhorton.net/arkcyclic.html]

The Pipe Classic composition has methods with odd-numbered pivot bells (3 in Deimos, 5 in Maypole, 7 in Zanussi, 9 in Ariel, 11 in Phobos). As an example of a later variation, John Warboys produced a composition in “red” methods on a very similar plan, but where the methods had even-numbered pivot bells instead.

Of course, with a cyclic construction there’s a strong case to be made for all 12 bells to be involved in the runs, rather than a fixed treble creating an artificial musical “block” that disrupts the runs.

As such, David soon developed a 12-part composition on a similar plan. Being a regular double method, the plain lead of Bristol / Maypole in the 11-part structure contains the row eg 234567890ET1 when the 2nd of the part is pivoting. As all other cyclic rotations of this row occur in different parts, and rounds itself is a cyclic rotation of this row, Bristol needs to be replaced with a different method to preserve truth. Here Glazgow Little Surprise is used:

5040 Spliced Maximus (6m)
1234567890ET
Lynx Diff 64523T10E897
Deimos A 653412ET9078
Phobos S 624T503817E9
Glazgow LS 6315E4927T80
Ariel S 6T204857391E
Zanussi S 61E39574820T
Zanussi S 60T827495E31
Ariel S 6E91738504T2
Glazgow LS 6807T92E4153
Phobos S 697E8103T524
Deimos A 67890ET12345
12-part. 1152 Ariel, Phobos, Zanussi S; 864 Deimos A; 576 Glazgow LS; 144 Lynx Differential. 119 com, atw for all 12 bells.

==2) The Rise of Mega-tittums – Philip Earis, David Pipe, Philip Saddleton, Rob Lee et al – February 2006==
The possibilities given by all consecutive bells coursing have already been mentioned in the royal article. Suffice to say, the effect becomes better and more pronounced the more bells there are.

I think I first wrote about the possibilities in this February 2006 message to this list: [http://www.bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2006-February/001292.html]

There was quick collaborative progress at developing the concept, developing ways of getting from rounds into all consecutive bells coursing as quickly and elegantly as possible.

David Pipe soon realised that a sequence of different bobs in the same position could be used for this. A 10ths place bob 'out' turns the coursing order from the plain course 324 to the tittums style 432. This effect is repeated with appropriate bobs every course until mega-tittums is obtained. The effect is then reversed with the inverse bobs in the second half:

3984 Bristol Maximus

O I 234567890ET

10 342567890ET

18 453627890ET

16 564738290ET

14 675849302ET

14 2345T6E7089

16 234567T8E90

18 23456789T0E

10 234567890ET

The figures refer to the type of bob. O is an 'out' for the tenor, I is an 'in' for the 2nd. Ideal for handbells - all pairs are either in their home position or coursing.

Philip Saddleton claimed independent discovery of this, but expanded the concept to a peal length by combining this structure with a cyclic 11-part plan. This can be very easily achieved by having a single lead of the method in the mega-tittums coursing order before reversing the transpositions:

33440 Maypole Alliance (or 6072 Crayford Little Bob)
0 1ET907856423
8 1ET907862534
6 1ET908273645
4 1ET029384756
4 1890E7T62534
6 1890ET273645
8 1890ET234756
0 1890ET234567
11-part

Rob Lee recognised that mx methods could be useful in the transition between tittums / cyclic courses, and put together a prototype composition:

5104 Spliced Maximus (4m)
234567890ET Br
795E3T20486 Br
T0E89674523 Av
14 ET089674523 Or
16 0E9T8674523 Av
18 908E7T64523 Or
10 89706E5T423 Br
10 ET029384567 Av
18 0E9T8234567 Li
16 908ET234567 Or
14 890ET234567
11 part.
584 Avon D., Bristol S., Orion S., 352 Littleport Little S., 98 com, atw

I further incorporated similar ideas in spliced maximus compositions using Pipe 11-part plans, but the real crowning glory of such a fusion would take a number of month’s further development…

3) “Jupiter” cyclic spliced 12-part on a mega-tittums plan – David Pipe – November 2007

The aim of this composition was to combine the cyclic runs character of the Classic 11- and 12-parts with some mega-tittums music where all consecutive bells are coursing. A 12-part structure is good because it naturally supports both the cyclic runs and the mega-tittums music.

The first half of each part is aimed at generating runs, whilst the second part efficiently gets to the mega-tittums coursing order, has a principle to exploit this and simultaneously switch to another part, and then reverses the bobs to get back to the part end.

The beauty of this composition is that both these halves have wonderful custom-designed features – features which may not be immediately apparent.

1234567890ET
Io LA 142638507T9E
Chaldene LA 13527496E8T0
Leda LA 1648203T5E79
Callisto LA 157392E4T608
Europa LTP 18604T2E3957
Europa LTP 1795E3T20486
Callisto LA 108T6E492735
Leda LA 19E7T5038264
Chaldene LA 1T0E89674523
Io LA 10 bob 1ET907856423
Plain B 18 bob 1ET907862534
Plain B 16 bob 1ET908273645
Amalthea LA 14 bob 1ET029384756
Amalthea LA 1T2E30495867
Ganymede Diff 12 bob 8907E6T54123
Amalthea LA 14 bob 890ET7162534
Amalthea LA 16 bob 890ET1273645
Plain B 18 bob 890ET1234756
Plain B 10 bob 890ET1234567
12-part

As far as I know, in all previous 12-part maximus compositions the methods used were pretty conventional, ie they weren’t designed for the treble to be involved in the runs as much as possible. The result can be more artificial musical “ disruptive breaks” where the treble of the part breaks up runs of other bells.

Here, however, the methods in the “runny” first half were tailor-made (with a consequent variety of treble paths) to bring out maximal music in all 12 parts, involving the treble in the runs.

In the mega-tittums second half, an intrinsic problem of the 12-part structure is that the mega-tittums coursing order is the same in each of the parts, leading to potential falseness problems.

David got round this problem by choosing methods which perhaps counter-intuitively give some runs-style music in the mega-tittums coursing order. The principle chosen here is Ganymede, which has elegant mirror symmetry as well as conventional palindromic symmetry.

The real crowning glory, though, is the use of Amalthea. Whilst this is a conventional a-group method, it is not really designed to be rung in its plain course; rather, it elegantly gives some really super runs music in the mega-tittums coursing order. The music is generates is wonderfully plentiful, but also incredibly unexpected. Runs of different types, both forward and backwards, frequently just pop out of the ether. The total effect is magical.

The composition is described more fully (including figures for the leads of Amalthea) in this November 2007 message: <http://www.bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2007-November/001840.html>

4) Single Surprise Maximus (b group)

· 5042 Cambridge - David Hull

· 5040 Yorkshire - Mark Davies

The decade saw further incremental progress with single-method peals, continuing the leap in attitudes started in the 1990s, and mirroring the developments in Royal compositions that have already been discussed.

Little bells runs continued to be at the fore, and happily misguided ideas such as that all compositions need to contain three whole courses of 65s seem to have been pretty well banished. Calls at 9ths are no longer a novelty, and calls in other places are becoming more commonplace.

Big bobs are around, and look to be here to stay. This is especially relevant for tenors-together b-group methods like Cambridge and Yorkshire, where the conventional length of 5042 almost invariably sees the peal have a big “duffer” section at the end.

The two b-group compositions I’ve selected are both on slightly shaky date ground for inclusion, as they were both in fact first rung in the second half of 1999 (though to other methods, I believe)

David Hull’s Cambridge has a lovely 2-part format, great use of the calls at 9ths (and potentially 8ths), and also well illustrates the musical sacrifices that must be made at the end of a composition to produce a 5042 on the usual plan:

5042 Cambridge Surprise Maximus (#4)

Composed by: David G Hull

2345678 9 M W 8 H

54362 S S S

24365 SS S SS

63452 S S SS S

34256 SS S 2

52436 S S

(32456) S

Omit 1 SS.

Mark Davies’ composition, which he calls "The Cosmic Joker", has the very attractive property that every full course contains both little-bell music and 56/65 rollups:

5088 Yorkshire Surprise Maximus

Mark B Davies

23456 B M W H

45236 - -

54362 x s

23465 s s

43652 s 2 -

43526 x -

64523 x - -

35426 - ss -

23456 -

x = 18

Includes 83 LB5, 165 LB4, 14 567890ET and 10 657890ET

5) Single Surprise Maximus – Bristol

· 5090 #4 – David Hull, October 2003

· 5088 – James Holdsworth, September 2008

· 5040 #3 – Mark Davies, January 2005

Bristol is a glorious method at all stages. Unlike something like Yorkshire, though, Bristol’s different leadhead groups at different stages mean than very different strategies need to be used on different numbers of bells to get the most of the method.

Happily Bristol Maximus doesn’t have the same intrinsic problem as b-group methods, in that a nice and musical snap finish can be achieved without much difficulty. There are literally hundreds of good tenors-together compositions to choose from here, by many composers – a nice illustrative example would be David Hull’s 5090 #4:

5090 Bristol Maximus (#4)

23456 M W H

64352 - -

45362 2

32564 - S

64523 S -

43526 - 2

(42536) SB

That said, the method is very flexible. A snap finish isn’t needed or necessarily desirable, and indeed great compositions can even exist in 2-part format.

I was very attracted to the neat simple 2-part James Holdsworth composition that employs whole courses to great effect. However, the accolades have to be reduced somewhat when you realise that DJP produced something very similar in the previous decade. Why neither of these appears in the RW diary would be a mystery if the diary’s selection criteria involved compositions having notable merit.

5088 Bristol Surprise Maximus
J W Holdsworth
23456 M 9 W H
----------------------
64352 - -
56342 -
54362 -s
24365 s
----------------------
Repeat

5088 Bristol Surprise Maximus

DJP
23456 M W H
---------------
64352 1 1
56342 1
24365 s 2*
---------------
2 part. 2*=sb.

For a further example of a composition full of little-bell music, with snappy transitions between sections and limited exposure to duffer courses, the Mark Davies composition below also shows the high bar that tenors together compositions have met:

5040 Bristol Surprise Maximus (#3)

23456 M H W

(53426) s

54326 s

56423 2 -

24365 - -

(36452) - - 2

64352 2

23456 s s

Contains 8 567890ET, 102 LB5, 213 LB4

6) Tenors-together spliced Treble Dodging Maximus (RABS)

· Alex Byrne – January 2008

· John Warboys – September 2009

Despite the cyclic developments of the decade, tenors-together spliced in “legacy” methods continues to be rung and developed. There have recently been two simple and very elegant compositions in the four “RABS” methods, Rigel, Avon, Bristol and Strathclyde.

Both are all-the-work, and manage to achieve this using musical courses (sometimes whole courses) throughout the compositions.

Alex Byrne’s composition is a lovely palindrome, whilst John Warboys’ uses a two-part structure. Both are well worth closer inspection.

5184 Spliced TD Maximus (4 methods)

Alex Byrne

M W H

- RRRRRR.

- AAAAAAAAAAA.BBBBBBB

2 - BBB.SAARAAS.SSSSSSSSSSS.

- - - R.RRRRR.R.

2 RBBBB.BBBBR.

- - - RRRRR.R.

2 SSSSSSSSSSS.SAARAAS.BBBBBBB

- - BBB.AAAAAAAAAAA.

5088 Spliced TD Maximus (4 methods)
John Warboys
23456 M W H
43526 2 1 AAAAAAAAAAA-SAB-BRS-
25634 1 1 R-BBASSARSS-A
46532 1 1 SRB-RRRRRRRRRRR-
24365 2 1 2 BRRA-A-RB-SRB-A-
34625 2 1 BBBBBBBBBBB-SAB-BRS-
26543 1 1 R-BBASSARSS-A
35642 1 1 SRB-SSSSSSSSSSS-
23456 2 1 2 BRRA-A-RB-SRB-A-
1296 B,R,S; 1200 A. 53 com; atw.
The full courses of R and S can be swapped if desired.

7) “Winking up” – Ander Holroyd / Adam Shepherd – August 2000

“Winking up” is a great concept that was briefly visited at the beginning of the decade. There hasn’t been much investigation since, but I’m convinced there could be tantalising possibilities here.

In short, “winking up” is a way of extending a method on n bells to a method on 2n bells. So far example what bell number 3 does in a minor method defines what bells 5 and 6 do in the related winked up maximus method.

This doubling lends itself to winked up methods being rung on handbells, but there’s no reason why this has to be the case.

The classic winking “algorithm” is that:

· If on the lower stage a bell makes a place, then on the winked up higher stage, the corresponding pair of bells will do a double dodge together.

· If on the lower stage a bell hunts, then on the winked up higher stage the corresponding pair of bells will ring four changes of plain hunt on four.

The practical consequence is that to wink up from minor to maximus, the following place notations map:

Minor Winked Up Maximus

- -4589-4589

14 -369-369

36 -470-470

12 -589-589

etc

This notation may not look the most elegant, but the effect can be really excellent. Pairs of bells stay together, hunting around the change like a double act.

There has been one winked up peal rung, Wee Willie Winkie Hybrid Maximus – a winked up London Minor – was rung in 2000, and this contained 1680 runs of 4 or more consecutive bells:

5184 Wee Willie Winkie Hybrid Maximus
Arranged Adam P. Shepherd
34567890ET
----------
- 09TE784365 2
- 567890ET43 1
- 34906587ET 1
- 349078TE65 4
p 87345609TE 1
----------
6 part
Bob = 369-369 for final 589-589

Wee Willie Winkie Hybrid Maximus:
-470-470-4589-4589-470-470-369-369-4589-4589-234589-589
-4589-4589-45670-470-36789-369-4589-4589-369-369-470-470
-36789-369-4589-4589-369-369-470-470-4589-4589-589-589
-4589-4589-369-369-470-470-4589-4589-470-470-589-589
(lh 128734TE6590)

Further applications can be found, I am sure. At the least, such ringing would make an interesting and very different-sounding block inserted into in a more conventional peal composition. The possibilities could be considerable – winking up cyclic methods, or tittums coursing orders, maybe. Or perhaps winky effects could be used with non-adjacent bells.

Of course, it’s not just six bell methods that can be winked up. I have vague recollections of ringing winked up Banana Doubles to create a fruity 10 bell method, as well as the memorable experience of winking up twice plain hunt on three, so it turned into a 12-bell method (the double winking was conceptually a bit tricky, at least at first, except for PABS).

There’s mileage in Shipping Forecast Singles yet…

==See Also==
*[[Compositions of the Decade 1 - Introduction]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 2 - Doubles]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 3 - Minor]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 4 - Triples]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 5 - Major]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 6 - Caters]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 7 - Royal]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 8 - Cinques]]
[[Category: Composition Reviews]]

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 2 - Doubles

2009-12-22T17:21:57Z

Pje24:

__NOTOC__
===A Review by Philip Earis - continued===
Doubles is the base from which change ringing really developed. It is a paradox that doubles has been both well-studied and much overlooked over the centuries.

The golden age for doubles was in the 17th Century, when a wide variety of methods were developed. Tintinnalogia (freely available online at http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/18567) remains a fresh and fascinating read. However, plenty of new ideas continue to abound today.

===Infinite possibilities===

Ringing on five is of course based around ringing 120-change extents – small enough to make things manageable, both from a ringing and composing point of view. Indeed, many problems can easily be exhaustively searched using a computer.

Because of the constraints, the boundaries between doubles compositions and methods can be rather arbitrary – the two concepts become intertwined.

However, the beauty is that rearranging five bells in different ways still allows massive possibilities. A single grain of sand contains around 7.8*10^19 (78 billion billion) atoms. The entire universe is believed to contain around 10^79 atoms. There are 6.7*10^198 possible ways of arranging the extent on five bells. In other words, there remains an eternity of new methods available. Doubles really retains its ability to interest, delight and surprise.

===Declining numbers===

Whilst many ringers' first introduction to change ringing is with doubles, ringers often seem keen to move away from five bell methods as quickly as possible.

There has been an alarming decline in doubles in recent decades, at least as far as peals are concerned – at the beginning of the decade peal numbers had fairly consistently been averaging about 200 a year (about 3% of all peals rung). By 2008 numbers had dropped to a record low of 123 peals (just 1.8% of the total). A further steep decline looks likely in 2009.

Even more worrying is that just one of the peals of doubles rung in the whole of 2008 contained methods which weren’t either plain hunt based or Stedman. Now there is nothing wrong with plain doubles methods per se, but this illustrates even more quite how unexplored the field of doubles ringing is.

It is frustrating to hear people say contemptuously that there's nothing worthwhile that can be done on five bells. This disdain is snobbery borne out of ignorance. A ringer who shuns lower numbers is usually running away from a challenge. It’s easy to formulate a peal of doubles that is vastly more complex than the most “advanced” spliced maximus that is rung.

A further paradox is that despite declining peal numbers and negative attitudes, the last decade (especially recent years) has seen great innovation resulting in excellent new extents of doubles. Building on new ideas from the 1990s, which for example saw many differential doubles methods rung, doubles is one of the big growth areas in ringing theory.

Recently, the main thrust of this development has come from Professor Alexander Holroyd, working out of his Vancouver lair. The Professor (one of the few ringers to have a mathematical constant named after him) has used his group theory expertise and innovative experimentation with different symmetries to great effect, as we shall see.

===Themes over the decade===

It is interesting how some of the new doubles developments have close parallels with the way early ringing pioneers worked in the 1600s. As in much of ringing, an effective way to finding a solution to a problem is by solving a simpler related problem.

With doubles, the key to finding interesting extents has often been to produce an in-course half extent - ie all 60 changes obtained only using double-changes (place notations 1, 3 and 5) - and then use a single to obtain the whole extent.

The most common extents of double rung, accounting for the vast majority of rung doubles, are Grandsire, Stedman, and Plain Bob. All of them elegantly produce extents based on in-course half-extents (with Plain Bob the argument is admittedly a bit more stretched and requires stitching together 10-change in-course blocks).

As we’ll see, the theme of in-course half extents will appear in my choices below, along with different symmetries and the difficulties in classifying some doubles extents.

Without further ado, here are my chosen doubles compositions.

==1) Jump Stedman - Ander Holroyd - First rung September 2008==

The first “composition of the decade” preserves the in-course half-extent beauty of Stedman, and miraculously converts it to a wonderful plain course extent, which is conceptually extremely satisfying, and great fun to ring

Just like in conventional Stedman, the method is divided into sixes, which have hunting on the front three bells whist the back two double dodge. Here there are four types of six, rung in the order (quick -> jump down -> slow -> jump up)

See the previous description on the [[Ringing Theory]] list at: http://bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2008-September/002748.html

And although not a new composition, Robert Johnson’s 2006 proof of how an in-course half extent (like conventional Stedman doubles) can always be expanded into a full extent (with Stedman, the resulting method is Crambo) deserves an honourable mention here.

==2) Multi-spliced doubles – Philip Saddleton – c2003-2009 (Unrung and unpublished)==

The past decade has seen progress in multi-splicing more conventional, treble-hunting doubles methods as well. Following his achievements in the realm of spliced minor compositions in the previous decade, Philip Saddleton has turned his hand to doubles. He has managed to include all 220 symmetrical single-hunt plain methods in 42 extents, using 2-lead, 3-lead, 4-lead and combination splices to fit everything in. The extents will be published as part of the new doubles collection – hopefully appearing soon. I hope Philip won’t mind me reproducing one extent here – a combination splice - as a sample of his work.

2345 96S
2453 94S
2534 88D
3245 158T
3524 148E
4352 44D
5423 125T
5342 127T
5234 117E
4523 55S
4235 48D
3452 150E
2345

I suspect Matthew Frye deserves credit for giving ideas for some of the extents.

==3) Banana Doubles - Ander Holroyd (building on Richard Smith) - First rung March 2009==

Another theme for the decade (on all stages) has been using different kinds of symmetry, rather than just the “conventional” palindromic symmetry.

One neat form of symmetry is “glide” symmetry, where the changes in the second half-lead are the reverses of those in the first. Whilst this has been used before (Double Eastern Bob Major, first rung in 1752, glides merrily along), it was employed to great effect in my second doubles composition of the decade:

Banana is a marvellous principle. There are some similarities to Stedman, with six consecutive changes of hunting on three, but the glide symmetry gives it a super fluidity. It combines a superficial simplicity with inspirational delight wonder when rung.

120 Banana Doubles
Alexander E. Holroyd 
% 1 % 2 % 3 12345
------------------
- - 54213
------------------
5 part 
Method: 3.2.3.2.3.4.3.4
bob = 2; hl bob = 4

The so-called “plain course” of Grandsire doubles can be considered a reverse-engineering of a neat in-course half-extent. In the same way, Banana Doubles can be considered the “pick of the bunch” of the exhaustive list of 101 Doubles methods that Richard Smith published in 2006, with the following properties

* Principles
* Plain course generates the extent
* No more than two consecutive blows in one place

Richard’s full list can be seen at: http://ex-parrot.com/~richard/doubles/extents/principles-2-blows.txt - it is a subset of the 52,227,975 methods he found that aren’t restricted to 2 consecutive blows in one place. It was pleasing to see a band ringing 42 different doubles principle plain-course extent methods in a peal in 2008.

==4) Magic block doubles – Philip Saddleton - September 2008 (unrung)==

It’s always possible to argue about whether something really is a reverse-engineer of something else. A notable and even more extreme example which highlights the problem of how to classify something was published by Philip Saddleton.

The father of “magic blocks” spliced, which had a big impact on minor ringing in the decade, PABS has here produced an extent containing seven different overworks and eight different underworks. It’s possibly the ringing equivalent of a bonsai tree.

5 bells
touch=+3.1,"B1",
&5.3.5,"F1",
&1.5.2,"B2",
&5.3.2,"F2",
&1.34.2,"B3",
&25.3.34,"F3",
&1.3.23,"B4",
&2.23.34,"F4",
&1.5.2,"B2",
&5.3.5,"F1",
&1.3.2,"B1",
&5.23.5,"F5",
&1.34.23,"B5",
&5.23.5,"F5",
&1.3.2,"B1",
&5.3.34,"F6",
&4.5.23,"B6",
&5.3.2,"F2",
&4.5.23,"B6",
&2.3.5,"F7",
&4.3.23,"B7",
&2.3.5,"F7",
&4.5.23,"B6",
&5.23.34,"F8",
+1.3.2,"B1"

==5) Hybrid doubles (15 change divisions) – Ander Holroyd – November 2008==

Few methods have been rung with an odd number of changes per division. Red Square Hybrid Doubles puts Ander’s group theory knowledge to innovative use, dividing the extent into 8 leads of 15 changes (with the treble of course ringing 3 blows in each place per lead) that form a group.

+125.145.3.123.1.345.125.1.345.123.1.3.125.145.3 
Extent: pppsppps; single = 1 for last 145

http://www.bellringers.org/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2008-November/002756.html

==6) In-course 120 – Andrew Johnson – October 2006==

Responding to a challenge on the [[Ringing Theory]] list, Andrew produced a very neat example of an in-course 120 of doubles, where each row occurs once at handstroke and backstroke.

+3.1.3.5.1.3.5.1.3.5.3.1.3.1.3.5.1.3.5.1.3.5.3.5

A 240 containing each row twice can trivially be obtained with a pair of singles.

==7) Dixonoid doubles – Philip Earis and Andrew Tibbetts – Autumn 2001==

Continuing the theme of things being difficulty to classify, the long established idea of “dixonoids” or rule based constructions made an appearance in the early years of the decade. Here, the place notation is defined “on the fly” based on which bells are leading. In the plain bob version, all bells plain hunt, with 2nds made when the treble leads (as in bob doubles), but with 4ths additionally made at the backstroke whenever 2 or 4 lead:

120 Dixon's Bob Doubles 
2345
- 5342 1
- 4235 2
- 4352 3
- 5432 2
- 3425 2
- 2345 2 
- = 145 at treble’s backstroke lead

In the Grandsire version, a 240 containing each row once at each stroke, the bells plain hunt, with thirds made the handstroke after the treble leads (as in normal Grandsire), and again with 2nds made when the treble leads (as in bob doubles), but with 4ths additionally made at the backstroke whenever 2 or 4 lead:

240 Dixon's Grandsire Doubles 
2345
s 4325 1
s 3425 6
s 2354 1
s 3254 6
s 3524 3
s 5324 6
p 2345 
s=123 at treble’s backstroke lead only

==8) Ocean Finance Doubles – Ander Holroyd – First rung March 2008==

+3.5.123.1.3.123 
Extent: TppTppTppTppTpAppppA 
T = 345 (instead of 123) at division end A = 145 (instead of 123) at division end

This is a clever asymmetric principle with six changes per division. Extents usually consist of an assembly of mutually true courses. This one doesn't, relying instead on a composition consisting of two distinct blocks. The blocks permute in the same order, neatly providing the complementary rows for their analogue so the extent is obtained.

Reviewing the selected compositions above, it does seem to have been a bit of a CUG-fest. This is not intentional – please do tell me what I’ve missed.

Next: [[Compositions of the Decade 3 - Minor|Compositions of the Decade 3 - A Minor Earthquake...]]

==See Also==
*[[Compositions of the Decade 1 - Introduction]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 3 - Minor]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 4 - Triples]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 5 - Major]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 6 - Caters]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 7 - Royal]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 8 - Cinques]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 9 - Maximus]]
[[Category: Composition Reviews]]

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 1 - Introduction

2009-12-22T17:21:28Z

Pje24:

===A Review by Philip Earis===

The end is nigh - the year draws to a close, and a new decade will soon be starting. In a contemplative moment, I feel that now seems like an appropriate time to reflect on the key ringing developments of the past ten years.

Over the coming days I will be posting sections of an article which I’ll call “Compositions of the Decade”. This is intended to feature what I think are some of the best, tangible developments in ringing theory in the past decade. The article will be divided in separate sections for each stage from doubles to 16+.

The list is not meant to be exhaustive. Rather, it is intended to capture some of the great new things that people have produced in recent years.

For selection criteria, I will concentrate mostly (but not exclusively) on new compositions rather than new methods. My selection criteria are naturally personal and subjective. My preferences are biased towards excellent use of innovative new concepts, and step-changes with existing problems, rather than more incremental advances.

Some of the things I’ll select have rarely if ever been rung. I make no apology for that – for far too long in ringing there has been a worryingly large gap between what is good and what is oft rung. Sometimes it takes time for great ideas and concepts to become widespread.

Still, there has been considerable progress in ringing attitudes over the decade. No serious composer now sticks to the dodgy dogmas that have blighted previous generations. Composition twenty years ago was a cruise. Now it runs.

I am sure there are great compositions which I have overlooked. Any insulting omission is probably unintended. I welcome debate. Let me know what I have missed.

My brief research is also far from meticulous, and I may have inadvertently included some things which pre-date the past 10 years.

Taking the long view is interesting, and I think the early years of this century may well come to be regarded as a golden age of ringing theory. Increased computer power has helped enormously here, evolving from simply a tool for proving compositions to become a powerful means for developing and optimising ideas. Given the vast, vast search spaces, though, computer power is usually just a tool that needs a clever mind to produce a great result. Intelligent design, one could say, is what differentiates composer from monkey.

Along with computers and a number of clever minds, advances have sometimes come from direct competition. Competition always spurs progress, and should be encouraged. But coupled to competition, the internet has facilitated collaboration and information sharing on a scale not previously seen. Composers working together competitively has had real benefits.

It is also of concern that many of the compositions I will include are hard to find, and in quite a few cases do not appear on the web, even on a fleeting medium like a personal website. It is hoped that efforts at producing a stable, central online repository for compositions will yield tangible results soon.

Next: [[Compositions of the Decade 2 - Doubles]]

==See Also==
*[[Compositions of the Decade 2 - Doubles]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 3 - Minor]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 4 - Triples]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 5 - Major]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 6 - Caters]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 7 - Royal]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 8 - Cinques]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 9 - Maximus]]
[[Category: Composition Reviews]]

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 8 - Cinques

2009-12-21T14:51:27Z

Pje24:

__NOTOC__
===A Review by Philip Earis - continued===
Cinques feels very claustrophobic at the moment, imprisoned by the irrational and still-increasing proportion of Stedman that is rung at this stage.

===By the numbers===
11-bell peals are up 9% over the decade compared with the 1990s. However, the real story is the method distribution within these peals.

Peals of Stedman Cinques are up 14%, and indeed now account for about 88% of rung 11-bell peals. The Stedman domination of the stage is increasing apace - peals of Grandsire are down 22% in absolute terms, falling to about 10% of rung cinques peals. Throw in a very small smattering of Erin and Plain Bob, and that completes the show. There is nothing else happening at all. No new methods, no spliced, nothing.

The decade has seen considerable compositional effort within the framework of Stedman, to be sure. Peals contain more musical rows, pay more attention to little bells, and are more varied than the simple stodgy compositional fare served up in the past: 6 and two 19s, and all that sort of thing. Cyclic patches, all “near miss” rows, and so on, seem more of a benchmark than an exceptional feature.

This progress is of course welcome, with the caveat that it’s only welcome where complexity genuinely adds value.

===Hitting the wall===
The problem is that the current direction of development gets to the point where ever-greater compositional complexity is needed, with the “reward” of arguably ever diminishing future returns. The whole thing about Stedman is that the coursing order gets disrupted by the method. This admittedly gives the advantage that it’s fairly quick to jump between any two rows – something that PABS’ turning course software and related new tools over the decade such as MBD and David Hull’s online “prickers” have helped to master.

However, the consequent disadvantage of the property that it is quick to jump between any two rows is that music in advanced Stedman compositions tends (needs?) to be all about jumping inelegantly between desired sixes, in a “chase the row” style. Lots of bobs to disrupt the flow, lots of inelegant compositional complexity, and then a fleeting effect when the desired six arrives.

As alluded to, an intrinsic property of Stedman is that it is hard to get big-bell and little-bell runs in the same course. The best Stedman compositions of the decade have tried to overcome this in neat, systematic ways with partial success, as we shall see.

However, the method will always be working against the composer.

===A new direction?===
So what to do? Well, with Stedman I feel the structure of the method naturally leads to some coursing music potential, and there remains further scope for exploiting such effects. Whilst the decade has seen a growing realisation that four consecutive bells coursing does not constitute “tittums”, proper tittums effects – which will of course propagate for more than one six – should still exist.

For example, the following course-ends (amongst many others) should give big bell coursing music around the course-end, with little-bell music around the half course.

2476839105E
2176859403E
6472859103E

However, the real key is for people to broaden their horizons. It’s not even that peals of Stedman are rung because they have a high chance of peal success. “Stedman and score” is not a phrase I’ve heard before.

Following on from the first variable cover peals in the 1990s, the present decade has seen the introduction of spliced cinques and maximus. There is no synergistic effect here. The effect that bolting Stedman onto Bristol gives is much more often parasitic.

Rather, there are unlimited new cinques method possibilities out there, unlimited glorious compositional possibilities unconstrained by falseness. Accepted wisdom is often counter-productive, and there’s no shortage of accepted thought when it comes to Stedman Cinques. More boldness is needed.

==1) Little bell Stedman==
*5074 Stedman Cinques – Philip A B Saddleton
*5000 Stedman Cinques – Mark Eccleston – July 2009
*5007 Stedman Cinques – Mark B Davies – 2003
*5004 Stedman Cinques – Michael P A Wilby – March 2005

These four compositions exemplify some of the compositional progress of the decade, showing how little bells can finally get involved in some of the action.

The cleverest is by Philip Saddleton, a valiant attempt to exploit some intrinsic properties of the method. The composition exudes intelligent design, cycling alternately through runs involving different adjacent groups of four bells in an elegant way, using short courses of 6 sixes.

Mark Eccleston’s neat composition has the footnote “contains little bell runs in every course”, which seems great until you see that said runs tend to be once a course, of the same type in the same place, achieved with blocks which keep the front six bells fixed. However, I think it would be unfair to parody this as essentially analogous to “traditional” compositions which keep the back bells fixed, though – here the back bells get to rotate through a sequence of pleasant course-ends, also.

MBD uses what he calls his “Generation Three little-bell block (Q)”. This bespoke block is used once a part to obtain maximum little-bell runs in the same courses as the conventional 78 and 87 “tittums” and 87 handstroke home big-bell positions he uses in his three-part plan.

Each repetition of the Q blocks gives the following run types:
course six runs
3 4
5 2345 back
4 4 6543 back
5
5 4
5 65432 hand
6 4 12345 back
5
7 4
5 12345 hand
8 4 65432 back
5

Mark’s Q-block is clearly well-designed, well-employed, and deserves greater attention.

Michael Wilby takes a similar approach, using a customised block to generate little-bell runs and applying it to several established back-bell positions. By introducing a few additional turning courses, he also churns out all 10 near misses, and several other notable rows.

5074 Stedman Cinques
Philip A B Saddleton

1234567890E 1 3 4 6
-----------------------
908E1234567 a
-----------------------
1490E236587 b |
----------------------- |
67E90583412 - - | |
320E9418765 - - | |
8590E761234 - - | |
14E90236587 - - | |
670E9583412 - - | |
3190E248765 - - - |A |
86E90572143 - - - - | |
230E9145678 - - - | |B
5890E674321 - - | |
41E90327856 - - | |
760E9852143 - - | |
2390E145678 - - | |
----------------------- |
57E90861342 - - - - |
140E9238765 - - - - |
8590E763412 - - |
7690E854321 A |
0E912345678 c |
-----------------------
2314567890E 3B
-----------------------
a = 9.12.13.14.15.17.18.20.21 (22)
b = 5.6.10.13.14.15 (20)
c = 1.2.5.6.7.8.12.13.14.15.17.18.21.22 (24) Start from rounds as the last row of a quick six

18 1234; 21 4321; 18 2345; 21 5432; 18 3456; 21 6543; 21 4567; 21 7654; 24 5678; 21 8765; 24 6789; 21 9876; 24 7890; 21 0987; 75 80; Each course is 6 sixes except where shown

5000 Stedman Cinques
Mark Eccleston
(3241658709E)
-----------
3241657E098 s13.s15
3241650E897 2
324165E0987 s2.s10.s13.s15
3241657E980 s2.s13
324165E7890 s10.s13.s15.s22
324165E7089 1
3241657980E 1.2.s13.s15.s22
32416587E90 2.22
3241658790E 12.14.15.16.17.18.19 (20)
3241657809E s2.s10.s13.s15
-----------
325164879E0 2.s6.s10.s13.s15
3251647E098 1.s5.13.14.s15 |
3251640E897 2.s5.s14 |
325164E0987 s2.s5.s10.13.14.s15 |
3251647E980 s2.s5.13.14 | A
325164E7890 s5.s10.13.14.s15.s22 |
325164E7089 1.s5.s14 |
3251647980E 1.2.s5.13.14.s15.s22 |
32516487E90 2.s5.s14.22 |
-----------
315264879E0 s5.9.10.s14
31526487E90 A
-----------
234165879E0 s5.s6.9.10.s14.s16
23416587E90 A
-----------
214365879E0 s5.9.10.s14
-----------
Round with a bob at 1.
Start at backstroke with rounds as the fifth row of a slow six.
First Rung: Birmingham (Cathedral) on 20 Jul 2009

5007 Stedman Cinques (#1)
Mark B Davies
2314567890E 3 6 7 9 12 14 16 18 19
---------------------------------------
12346578E90 (a)
241365 s - |
432165 s - |
314265 s - |
254163 - s s s | Q
514623 s s s |
523614 s s s s |
263154 s s s |
214365 s s s s - |
---------------------------------------
13246587E90 (b)
341265 s -
423165 s -
21537486 s - - -
12537486 s
12346587 s s s - -
21436587 Q
---------------------------------------
1324658709E (c)
341265 s -
423165 s -
21437586 s s - -
21536487 s s -
125364 s
123465 s s -
214365 Q
---------------------------------------
a = 1 5 8 9 10 11 s13 14 15 (20 sixes)
b = s2 s7 s13 s15 18
c = 2 s7 s15 18
Contains:
23 567890E, 7 near misses, 42 LB5 front & back, 79 LB4 front & back.

5004 Stedman Cinques
Michael P A Wilby
(3241658709E) 1 5 6 7 9 14 16 18 19
--------------------------------------
3241657890E 2.12.14.16.17.18.19 (20 sixes)
3124 1s.10s.18
2134 - s
--------------------------------------
14236578E90 - s - |
532461 - s s |
4352 s s - |
315264 - s s | A
314265 s s s |
325164 s s |
324165 s s s - - |
--------------------------------------
1342658790E 2.7s.9.10.13s.15.16.18s
--------------------------------------
213465E7908 7s.9s.15.16.18
324165 A*
--------------------------------------
2351748690E 3s.6.7.12.15s
123475869E0 1.6.7.9.10.16s.18
2143758609E 1.7s.9s.18
--------------------------------------
21346587E90 2s.3.9s.12.15s.18
324165 A*
--------------------------------------
2134658709E 2.7s.15s.18
324165 A*
--------------------------------------
A* = A, without - at 1

Start at backstroke with rounds as the fifth row of a slow six.
NB the first call (2) is at the first six end of the peal.
Contains all 10 near misses, tittums, and little-bell rollups.
First Rung: Birmingham Cathedral on 14 Mar 2005

==2) “All-in” Stedman Cinques – David Hull – September 2009==
Drawing on Stedman trends over the decade, many of which he instigated, David put together a “turning-course dominated” double-peal of Stedman which is a very significant challenge to call. He successfully shows that a peal can generate lots of musical rows of Stedman, with rapid transitions.

Indeed, this composition beautifully exemplifies recent Stedman cinques compositional trends, as well as simultaneously highlights both the intrinsic strengths, limitations and weaknesses of the method.

10000 Stedman Cinques
1234567890E Sixes
123456E9780 S1.4.5.6.7.9.S12.13.14.15.16.17.18 18
21E90785634 S2.S4.5.6.9.S12.13 16
7890E123456 3.4.S6.9.10 12
7864523E190 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
234567890E1 3.4.6.7.9.10 12
2310E896745 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
5193276E480 2.6.S8.S14.S16 18
5463217890E 1.2.3.5.7.9.10.11.12.16 18
23145678E90 1.7.8.9.10.11.S13.15.16 20
3421 S16.18 |
4132 S16.18 | A
1243 S16.18 |
E1089674523 S2.4.S6.S13.14.17 18
E1352749608 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
1E860492735 6.S8.9.11.13.15 16
1E234567890 4.6.9.11.13 14
1423E098765 3.S5.6.8.S10.11.14.18.20.22.25.27 28
4312 S16.18
3421 S7.S9.18
4357698E021 6.S8.9.11.13.15 16
132540E8967 2.6.9.10.11.S14.15 16
1423E975680 3.4.5.S7.8.12.13.S15.17.18 18
2134 A
213465E7908 1.2.3.4.S5.S7.S9.12.14.15.16 18
3241 A
3152648709E S10.S15.18.19
31527486 3.4.12.S17
32516487 3.4.12.17.18
231465 6.7.S9.18
3421 3.4.S12.16.17.18 |
4132 3.4.S12.16.17.18 | B
1243 3.4.S12.16.17.18 |
21E09876543 6.S8.9.11.13.15 16
E9753124680 S1.S4.5.S8.10 10
879E0123456 S1.3.7.S10 10
786452391E0 5.6.8.S11.12.13.15.16 16
E1902345678 S2.4.6.8.9.10.11.12.13.14 14
E019 18
09E1 S16.18
90E1 S16
908674523E1 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
4567890E123 3.4.6.7.9.10 12
453120E8967 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
0E123456789 3.4.6.7.9.10 12
0E978563412 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
567890E1234 3.4.6.7.9.10 12
1543E276980 S3.4.S6.S9.10.12.S15.18.19.20 20
213546798E0 1.3.4.6.9.11 12
7654321E098 3.4.S7.9.10 12
768091E3254 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
12345E67890 S1.2.3.4.S11.12.13.14 14
43125678E90 1.3.5.10.14.16.17.18 18
1423 A
9785634120E S4.S6.S8.11.12.S14 14
E0981234567 6.7.8.9.11.13.15.16.18.20.23.25 26
674523819E0 2.4.6.8.9.10.11.12.13.14 14
4362850719E 1.2.4.S6.9 10
13E29078564 6.8.10.11.13.15 16
14236587 2.S7.8.S11.S14.15 16
2134 A
4132E098765 S5.6.8.S11.12.14.18.20.22.25.27 28
1243 S16.18
2134 S7.S9.18
12537486E90 S1.5.8.11.12.13.14 16
124375869E0 S10.S19
2134 S7.S9.18
1234 S16
2134658709E 1.3.4.12.16.17
3241 B
0E869472513 S1.2.3.4.6.7.S11.12.13.S15 16
0E351729486 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
089E7654321 4.6.S9.11.13 14
2314657890E S1.S5.S7.9.10.13.S15 16
2314568790E 1.S4.5.S7.8.9.S12.S14.15.16.17.18 18
231465E7908 S1.S4.5.S7.8.9.S11.12.13.14.15.16.17.18 18
1243 A
23517496E80 3.S12.13.S16.18.19.22
Full slow six start.
Rounds in 4 changes.

===3) Stedman Cinques on a “magnificent six” plan – PABS – 2003===
One of a very small number of compositions of cinques to take a different approach, Philip Saddleton here employs the concepts of the “magnificent 6” caters / royal compositions in a 44-part cinques composition.

Stedman clearly lacks advantages of Erin here, at using the plain method to transition between a row and its reverse. The concept is right, the execution here interesting and elegant without being knock-out.

5016 Stedman Cinques by Philip A B Saddleton
(after P J Earis)
2314567890E
-----------
35179E24680 a
9807654321E b
-----------
61E72839405 b
12E34567890 a
-----------
11-part
a = 2s.4.5.7.8.11s.14.16s.20 (20)
b = 1s.4s.6.7.9s.12s.16.18 (18)
Queens; Tittums; Back rounds;

==See Also==
*[[Compositions of the Decade 1 - Introduction]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 2 - Doubles]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 3 - Minor]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 4 - Triples]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 5 - Major]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 6 - Caters]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 7 - Royal]]
[[Category: Composition Reviews]]

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 7 - Royal

2009-12-21T14:51:01Z

Pje24:

__NOTOC__
===A Review by Philip Earis - continued===
Royal ringing has greatly improved over the decade, becoming much sharper and more focused. Progress has occurred across the board, with a shift to better established methods, the appearance of some cracking and daring new methods, and a trend towards smarter and neater “runny” compositions, without fear of conventional dogmas.

These trends have been further extrapolated with the widespread development of both cyclic compositions, along with some great new cyclic methods also. Furthermore, as we shall see other very new types of compositions have also established a foothold.

===Established Methods===
Turning first to single-method peals in established methods, the decade has enjoyed a marked transition towards better methods with more musical potential.

Ten-bell peal numbers overall seem to show a sustained rise compared with the 1990s. Peals of Yorkshire royal are up 25%.

However, the biggest trend by far has been the stratospheric rise in Bristol. There have been 718 peals of Bristol Royal published so far since the beginning of the year 2000, a massive 120% rise on the 326 from the 1990s. Peal bands around the country, perhaps especially in the North West, have been attracted to the beautiful elegance and music potential of the method, and their thirst for the nectar of musical compositions has been a force for progress.

Happily, there has also been a reduction in some of the nastier elements of 10-bell ringing. Peals of Rutland are down 37%, Pudsey down 43%, and spliced in 8 methods (which on ten almost invariably means one thing) down 24%.

===New methods – “regular”===
It has been a great decade for new royal methods. Triton Delight - quite simply London Royal with music off the front - was first pealed in May 1999, and there have subsequently been over 60 repeat performances. Whilst this is an indicator of progress, it is sadly a sign of some conductors’ intransigence that there have still been an order of magnitude more peals of London. This gap will surely be further eroded in the years ahead.

The two other great royal methods of the 1990s – Normanby Surprise, and Brave New World – set the scene for the developments of the 2000s. Neither stuck to tired and pointless limiting conventions – Normanby is a super double mx method with 3 consecutive blows, whilst Brave New World eschewed both conventional symmetry and plain bob leadheads to launch a cyclic odyssey.

The new methods of the present decade have continued and developed these trends, to impressive effect. Mark Davies has led the charge with “regular” (ie plain bob leadhead), coursing-dominated methods, including:

Black Pearl: &-5-4.5-2.3.2-9.8.9-6.7-6-1,1
Snow Tiger: &3-5.4-5-3.2-9.8-6-7.6-8.9,2
Raspberry Crumble: &3-5.4-5-3-2-8-56.4.3.2-8.9,2
Jennie’s Endeavour: &3-5.4-5-3-3478-58-6-7.6-8.9,2

Whilst there is little point in breaking conventions just for the sake of it, there is even less point in conventions existing just for the sake of it. It is good to see innovative examples of methods with 9ths in the notation above the treble, for just about the first time. These allow, inter alia, elegant double methods like Snow Tiger.

Incidentally, whilst I think I first published the figures for double method Snow Tiger (Royal), Mark claims an independent earlier discovery, and links it with his eponymous delight maximus method. The method is certainly good enough to fight over.

===New methods – cyclic glory===

In parallel to the above, the early years of the decade saw the arrival of a string of cyclic methods – ie methods with leadheads that are rotations of rounds. Cyclic methods cannot have conventional palindromic symmetry (at least not if started at the symmetry point). However, other symmetries can be used. The super new major method Anglia Cyclic (+-1-2367-1-7-5-36-4-2) employed rotational symmetry, but here on ten bells two new method stand out:

[http://ringing.org/main/pages/blueline?title=Double+Resurrection+Cyclic+Bob+Royal Double Resurrection (+-678-67-1-7-9-345-45-1-4-2)]
Spinning Jennie (&56.3-4.5.2-1-34-5.36.4-1.56.8.56.1,1)

The very simple right-place plain method Double Resurrection uses glide symmetry to great effect, whilst MBD’s Spinning Jennie cleverly is conventionally double (building on a Philip Saddleton idea), nominally with irregular leadheads, but is started at the treble snap to magically produce a clever cyclic method.

These both offer an incredibly concentrated musical experience and are really pleasurable to ring. If there’s one thing you take home from this whole series of articles, it should be to try ringing some cyclic royal.

===Composition trends===
The vast majority of royal peals rung continue to be in regular (ie plain bob leadhead) methods. And the compositions for these – both in what has been produced and in what is frequently rung - have both leapt forward over the decade.

Continuing a previous trend, little-bell runs have been very much at the fore – the progress is such that any new royal composition citing a “CRU” count would be laughed out of court. Compositional footnotes like “All courses contain little-bell music” have not only appeared, but become much more common - yardsticks, even.

Indeed, the trend towards runs has been extrapolated to cyclic compositions also - both pure cyclic 9- and 10-parts, and compositions including cyclic transitions, have featured prominently.

Cyclic compositions are especially attractive – and have become almost the default – in spliced, offering an easy yet potentially really musical way to achieve all-the-work for all the method. Indeed, the decade has seen the emergence of the first adventurous “bespoke” peals of spliced royal, with the methods customised to maximise the composition’s music, as we shall see.

Bespoke compositions have also taken off in single method peals, especially Bristol Royal. David Hull has led the way here – the method’s flexibility allows different tastes to be catered for. The trend has continued to other, less compliant methods – Graham Bradshaw has done some good work trying to squeeze music from Cambridge, for example (I haven’t selected these below, but see www.ringing.org for examples).

Clever tricks have also improved straight 14-course tenors-together compositions in single methods. Two-parts with just calls at M, W and H are very common, and many people might have thought all possibilities had been exhausted by the end of the 1990s. However, such 2-part compositions have expanded beyond just straight 1243657890 partend changes, with some interesting developments with 1654327890 partends.

Just like with major, a mixture of pencil-and-paper logic and the raw power of the SMC32 software have meant that many better royal compositions have been produced.

As an aside, I have no qualms about using the word “better” – with orchestral music, it’s very subjective and not meaningful to compare Mahler and Handel with a view to ranking them. However, change ringing’s constraints and formalisms mean that any effect (and hence any set of compositions) can be quantised in a systematic way. The only input is choosing a suitable metric to compare. Over the decade different composers’ metrics have started to converge, I feel, and whilst complete convergence is unrealistic (and arguably undesirable), there is still some way to go to avoid people talking across each other.

Moreover, royal compositions have seen much acceptance and uptake of less conventional calls, when used to good effect. Calls at 7ths, and indeed different bobs such as 16, 18, 123456 have all appeared, and also led to improvements in simple 2-part compositions.

Using multiple types of calls can be an elegant way to get all consecutive bells coursing, and other new types of compositions based on this “mega tittums” plan have made their first appearance. 10 bells are just about enough for the effect to be pronounced and effective.

===Summary===
Like standing on high ground and admiring the vista behind after a long walk, it’s an exhilarating time to survey the progress in 10-bell ringing. The march towards even higher ground needs to continue. Let’s just hope that the broader body of ringers catch up with the advances, and these are better reflected in what is actually frequently rung.

==1) Further improvements in two-part tenors-together compositions==

* Triton Delight – David Hull et al – 2003
* Yorkshire Surprise – Mark Davies - 2004

I’ve selected David’s Triton as the lead typical example of how simple tenors-together compositions have got better in recent decades. The grounds for inclusion could be questioned here – the composition is an improved tweak from Don Morrison based on the 1990s Hull little-bell classic “the fluke”, whilst the method has similarities to London (the overwork and leadhead group), but with substantially more music under the treble. Overall, though, I feel this shows what can be simply achieved which in the past simply was not achieved:

5040 Triton Delight
23456 M W H
42356 -
65324 - - -
43526 - -
25634 - -
34562 - s s
56342 - -
24365 - - -
Repeat

Touch contains:
Odd Even Total
xxxx567890 = 0 + 14 = 14
xxxx657890 = 0 + 14 = 14
xxxxxx2345 = 12 + 12 = 24
xxxxxx5432 = 12 + 12 = 24
xxxxxx3456 = 24 + 24 = 48
xxxxxx6543 = 24 + 24 = 48
0987xxxxxx = 70 + 0 = 70
7890xxxxxx = 42 + 0 = 42
2345xxxxxx = 8 + 8 = 16
5432xxxxxx = 6 + 6 = 12
3456xxxxxx = 14 + 14 = 28
6543xxxxxx = 14 + 14 = 28

MBD also claims a re-arrangement, changing two pairs of bobs for singles, but without extra musical gain. He’s on less shaky ground when he turns to Yorkshire. The composition below contains a great spread of little-bell music, both in variety of runs and in its distribution in the composition. The finish is especially nice, going from 24653 to 53246 in the last course of the peal.

In Mark’s words,

''“This is my absolute favourite conventional two-part… 3.5 courses of the last part are in LB5 coursing orders. I think it's absolutely fascinating that such a result is possible from a two-part structure: a very simple structure, too, that really just boils down to 2W 2H repeated, padded. To ring, it's possibly even better than the best one-part -very-nearly-almost as much music, plus all the fun of watching the second part unfold knowing what the first has foretold. Magic”. ''

Indeed.

5040 Yorkshire (No.1)
23456 M W H
---------------
24356 s
53462 s 2 2
46325 s s -
53624 - -
24365 - s s
---------------
2 part

Contains:
13 567890
13 657890
53 LB5
104 3456/6543
60 2345/5432
10 4567/7654

==2) Cyclic method compositions==

* Double Resurrection Cyclic Bob – Andrew Tibbetts – 2003
* Spinning Jennie Delight – David Pipe - 2003

As described above, Double Resurrection is a fantastic yet simple right-place plain cyclic method. It has an efficient structure and glide symmetry, leading to reverse runs round every half-lead, and forward runs round every leadhead.

The composition below is the first to combine the excellent “magnificent 6” rounds -> queens transition on 10 bells with the benefit of a cyclic method to fully exploit the effect. And the effect is truly mesmerising. I find it hard to fully describe its joys to those who haven’t experienced it.

1234567890 (rounds)
----------
1357924680 (queens)
1594837260 (reverse tittums)
1987654320 (reverse rounds)
1864297530 (reverse queens)
1627384950 (tittums)
1234567890 (rounds)

The plain nature of the method means that varied music appears very frequently, in a continuous “music box” demonstration. This, coupled with the rapid forward / reverse nature of the music, further magnify the effect. Both the tittums and queens block cycles (and their reverses) sound much more appealing than you might naively expect.

(Of course, when the composition is in the “reverse rounds” section, the forward runs appear around the half-lead)

The remainder of the composition consists of singled-in courses to provide a joyful variation on the theme. It’s awesome.

5040 Double Resurrection (#6)
5 6 7 8 9 234567890
ss ss s ss 324
s s 243
(a) 357924680
ss s 375
(a) 594837260
s 549
(a) 987654320
6 ss s 978
(a) 864297530
ss s 846
(a) 627384950
s 672
(b) 432567890
s 423
s s 234567890

(a)=2,s3,s5,7,8,9,s12 (12 leads)

Of course, the “magnificent six” transition can also be captured in a composition using methods with plain bob leadheads. The four-lead block 1,2,4 has been used in a number of David Hull Bristol Royal compositions to achieve this effect (more on this later), and can be extrapolated to a whole peal composition. Rob Lee put together the following:

5220 Double Coslany/10440 Bristol:

234567890
---------------------
1, 2, 4 864297530
1, 2, 4 594837260
4 602374859
2, 3, 4 972640853
2, 3, 4 342907856
s1, s8, 9 345678902
---------------------
9 part. Contains the 54 cycles of rounds, queens & tittums and reverses thereof.

This exploits the regular nature of the method, using half the plain course to join up the reverse tittums/tittums and reverse rounds/rounds positions. As Rob explains,

''“…Doing this means that some of the part ends occur at handstroke instead of backstroke, and so the 1,2,4 block is used in reverse when this is the case. Unfortunately, the cyclic part end obtained is 567890234 which means rounds occurs after 3 parts. A bit of fiddling around solves this, but at the expense of a bit of symmetry/music”''

Going back to cyclic methods, a further example of what can be achieved is with the treble-dodging method Spinning Jennie. The method is conventionally double with the following notation:

&56.3-4.5.2-1-34-5.36.4-1.56.8.56.1, 1 = 1485309627

However, ringing this starting away from the symmetry point brings up the cyclic method:

+x4.5.2x1x34x5.36.4x1.56.8.56.1.56.8.56.1x4.36.5x34x1x2.5.4x3.56.1.56.3 = 1345678902

The music isn’t as concentrated or dare I say pronounced as Resurrection, but still allows some very interesting effects. David Pipe put together the following composition, designed to bring out the runs given by the method.

5000 Spinning Jennie Delight Royal
1234567890
-------------------------------------
1543267890 s4.s4½
1452367890 3.4
1325476980 s4.s4½.s7.s9
1325476809 9
1234568709 3.4.7
1345627890 s1.3.5.s8
1436578902 3.4.7.9
1243658709 7.8 (8 leads)
1243658079 s9
1243650987 s½.8.9
1234569078 4.5.8.9
1234560987 8.9
1325460897 3.4.s9
1234567890 s½.3.4
-------------------------------------
Backstroke-snap start and finish.

Bob = 38, Single = 389 both made at the backstroke-snap.
Half-lead single = 89

There remains an opportunity for a magnificent 6 style composition here, I feel.

==3) Bespoke cyclic royal compositions – David Pipe – April 2003 / October 2003==

David Pipe’s 9-part and 10-part spliced royal compositions are a sort of contraction of his classic maximus compositions on a similar plan.

The methods in the royal peals – named after James Bond villains – are all custom-designed to yield a feast of music in the leads they appear in the composition. The new methods used, such as Goldfinger, are also intrinsically very attractive.

A link method is used to move the bells between the cyclic parts. The main block of the composition has the 2nd and the tenor of that cyclic part (so in the 9-part composition, bells 5 and 6 in the first part) alternately ringing “pivot leads”, ie the leads where they are the pivot bell.

Pivot leads are almost invariably the most musical in a method, and this structure yields a great way to ring as many plain leads in the part as possible, benefitting from an elegant palindromic structure which leads to a great balance of forward and reverse runs in each part.

Unlike maximus, a cyclic royal composition of primarily treble-dodging (single-dodging) methods needs to contain more than just the plain leads from each cyclic part to take the length over 5000 changes. In the Pipe compositions, the “padding” is based on two blocks of three bobs.

“Padding” is an unfair word as these sections are also very well-chosen, though. Custom-designed methods are again used for the best effect – for example, Kananga, which yields limited music off the front in the plain course, but much more in the 243 course in which it actually appears in the composition.

All in all, two finely crafted examples. (David Hull also has a similar, later composition containing methods with “opposite” pivot bells)

5022 Spliced Royal (8m)
234567890 Oddjob Little Alliance
-453028967 Ourumov Surprise
342590786 Zorin Surprise
-345028967 Kananga Surprise
-534028967 Scaramanga Alliance
452390786 Goldfinger Surprise
305846279 Dr No Differential Surprise
249573608 Blofeld Alliance
083657492 Blofeld Alliance
927465830 Dr No Differential Surprise
860739524 Goldfinger Surprise
796284053 Scaramanga Alliance
-867902345 Kananga Surprise
-786902345 Zorin Surprise
897264053 Ourumov Surprise
-678902345
9 part

720 each Dr No Differential S., Goldfinger S., Kananaga S.,
Ouromov S., Zorin S.; 648 each Blofeld A., Scaramanga A.;
126 Oddjob Little A.; 125 changes of method, all the work

5000 Spliced Royal (8m)
8901234567 Nick Nack
-------------------------------------
-1908674523 Largo Alliance
1897056342 Zorin Surprise
-1890674523 Kananga Surprise
-1089674523 Scaramanga Alliance
1907856342 Drax Little Alliance
1860492735 Dr No Differential
1795038264 Jaws Little Alliance
1648203957 Jaws Little Alliance
1573920486 Dr No Differential
1426385079 Drax Little Alliance
1352749608 Scaramanga Alliance
-1423567890 Kananga Surprise
-1342567890 Zorin Surprise
1453729608 Largo Alliance
-1234567890
-------------------------------------
10 part

800 Dr No Differential S, Kananga S, Zorin S; 640 Largo A; 600 Jaws Little A; 560 Drax Little A, Elektra A; 240 Nick Nack Differential Little Hybrid; 139 changes of method, All the work for all 10 bells

24 each 123456, 234567, 345678, 456789, 567890 at the back

In a related field, the late John Leary put together a series of 30 spliced royal methods in a cyclic 9-part construction. Whilst this doesn’t have the same bespoke qualities of the Pipe compositions (for example lacking a pivot-lead structure in the plain course), it contains many interesting methods and neat leads.

The composition is simply four bobs at Before to bring up the cyclic part-end 1902345678. The methods are well-structured, with some very nice new methods created for the peal (see for example Bramall Lane, b& 3-56.4-56-6-4-5.4.56.4.5-56-1, 2).

The composition was first rung (in shortened form) in 2007, and forms the basis for longer lengths of royal to be attempted shortly – sadly John isn’t around to complete his good work. The effort to expand the composition has involved some additions from David Hull and some very recent distributed further progress. Watch this space…

234567890
573920486 Beginning
648203957 Kenilworth Road
089674523 Loftus Road
860492735 Bristol
907856342 Stinking Bishop
795038264 Nideggen
426385079 Otterbourne
352749608 Bramall Lane
- 908674523 Savernake
897056342 Kegworth
069482735 Fereneze
640293857 Gresty Road
234567089 Burnden Park
352748690 Allington
573829406 St Neots
- 906482735 Burnley
698074523 Jugsholme
867950342 Kananga
785639204 Lufkin
420395678 Thimbleby
352748069 Essex
234507986 Clifton
- 904263857 Quixwood
573826049 Craven Cottage
785634290 Kings Norton
867459302 Southampton University
496082735 Goldfinger
352708964 City Ground
230597486 Stratford upon Avon
- 902345678 Elgin

===4) Further improvements in two-part tenors-together compositions – 1654327890 partends===

* Yorkshire Surprise – Mark Davies - 2002
* Yorkshire Surprise – David Pipe – 2009
* Bristol Surprise – John Warboys – c2006

Whilst many previous examples of two-part compositions involved the partend 1243657890, the decade saw the emergence of some interesting examples with a partend 1654327890.

This framework is elegant, with the clear attraction that wherever a run involving bells 2,3,4,5,6 appears in the first half of the composition, a corresponding reverse run will delight in the second half.

[This effect isn’t guaranteed in 2-parts with a 124365 partend – see for example the 2nd part of Chris Poole’s 5080 #2 (MIVMHHMW)

Mark Davies created some 2-parts of Yorkshire on this new plan in 2002, though waited 7 years before publishing (after a very tidy new DJP composition on this theme was published);

5040 Yorkshire Surprise Royal (DJP)
M W H 23456
- 2 24536
2 3 43526
- X 65432
2-part
X=16

5040 Yorkshire Surprise Royal, arr MBD (SMC32)
No.1 (local scope)
23456 M W B H
24536 - 2
53624 - x
46325 - -
24365 -
53462 - -
65432 -
2 part, x = 16

5040 Yorkshire Surprise Royal, arr MBD (SMC32)
No.2 (local scope)
M W H 23456
- - 64352
2 2 53462
s s 24365
s 23465
s - 65432
2 part

John Warboys, Don Morrison and other have also explored this effect. A simple example by John is his Bristol Royal:

5040 Bristol S. Royal
23456 V O I
35426 -
32546 2 -
46325 - 2
43652 x
65432 - -
2-part. x = 167890.
All courses contain little-bell music.

===5) Bespoke single-method compositions of Bristol Royal – David Hull – various===

Also:
* Bristol / Triton / Yorkshire – Chris Poole
* Eg Jennie’s Endeavour – Mark Davies

There are different schools of thought about Bristol Royal peal compositions. Neat tenors-together peals, especially two-parts, are well-suited to 8ths place calls. (John Warboys’ example above being just one example).

Indeed, Mark Davies goes so far to stated on his website that,

''“From a musical perspective, Bristol Royal is better with 8th's place bobs; with an average of only just over one call per course possible with 4th's place bobs, the linking possibilities are very slim, making it very hard to stay in good courses and avoid the bad. 4th's place calls are also bad news for those who like their course-end rollups”''

I feel this is too much of a generalisation. As mentioned in the introduction, Bristol Royal ringing and compositions have undergone a renaissance in the past decade. Much of this has been down to bespoke compositions, many by David Hull.

David’s use of the four-lead block 1,2,4 to achieve the magnificent six transition has already been mentioned. Similar motifs, such as the six-lead block S2.S4.S6 to act as a cyclic shunt (whilst going from forward to reverse runs) are also very well employed in his compositions.

An example well-rounded composition illustrative of the progress is:

5002 Bristol Surprise Royal (no.10)
234567890 Leads
243 SH
56342 SM.W
7654382 7ths.Out
902345678 1.3 3
987654320 7.13 21
357924680 1.2.4 4
627384950 1.2.4 4
987654230 S1.2.4 4
432567890 3.9.11 11
423 SH
(53624) M.W
24365 M.SW.SH
(42536) W.M.SW

First rung at Northallerton, 21 July 2007

It should be mentioned that various other composers have played with neat transition blocks as well. For example, Chris Poole has various nice compositions here – in Bristol he uses 7 & 8 lead courses called (3, 4½) and (2½, 4) for a cyclic shift (alternating the stroke of runs also), whilst analogous 8 & 9 lead blocks in Triton called (1, 3) also lead to notable compositions:

5160 Triton Delight Royal
234567890
----------------------------
354769820 1 3 (8)
456789023 1 3 (9)
576982043 1 3 (8)
678902345 1 3 (9)
798204365 1 3 (8)
890234567 1 3 (9)
920436587 1 3 (8)
023456789 1 3 (9)
243657089 1 4 (8)
243659078 5 (9)
243657890 4 5 (9)
34625 1 3 5 8 (8)
64523 1 (9)
35426 1 9 (9)
23456 8 (9)

As a related example, Chris has also exploited the simple effect of calling pairs of bobs on a series of bells to achieve a nice simple Yorkshire composition from 2001:

5162 Yorkshire Surprise Royal (No. 2)
234567890
--------------------------
902345678 2,10,11,19 (23)
789023456 2,10,11,19 (23)
543209876 2,10 (16)
765432098 2,10,11,19 (23)
987654320 2,10,11,19 (23)
524367890 2,10,12 (16)
(324) s5
Call paired bobs on 10-6, 6-10 followed by W sW.

Finally in this section I feel it’s appropriate to highlight an example of a bespoke composition in a great new method. I’ve selected this composition of the previously-mentioned Jennie's Endeavour Surprise Royal – both the method and composition are by Mark Davies.

The method is f-group royal with a feature that appeared a number of times in new methods over the decade: regular handstroke half-leads (so backrounds appears in the plain course at handstroke).

The consequence of this is that calls at the half-lead have the opposite effect to leadend calls. In MBD’s words,

''“This means rapid and unexpected jumps from one position to another can be carried out, and without having to trawl through undesirable leads. Part of the goal of this peal was to provide something really exciting and unpredictable, so the band never knows what is going to come up next”''

The composition makes good use of this property, utilising four types of calls to pack in a varied heap of music. The method is coursing-dominated, and to exploit this the composition also contains sections of what MBD slightly ambitiously calls “tittums” (here four consecutive bells coursing). Again, to quote the loquacious MBD,

''“Coursing orders are often revisited unexpectedly, and the same backbell positions are brought up in different ways. Both the front bells and the back bells are turned around on average more than once a course, but despite the dynamic movement the little bells remain throughout the peal in coursing orders which provide runs of varying kinds”''

5000 Jennie's Endeavour Surprise Royal
234567890
---------
65432 1 8 9 (MWH)
62345 3½ 4½ 5½ 8
43526 1 8 (MW)
435267089 4
243657890 3½ X 7½
325460987 s3½ s4 s5 s5½ 8 9
674523890 3½ s4 4½ s5 5½ 7
634527089 4 s7
234569078 s1 5
354269870 3 3½ 4½ s7½ 9
645237890 ½ s4 4½ 5½ 8½
645239078 4 5
632547890 ½ 3½ 4½ 5½ 8 8½
23456 1 (M)
---------

4th's place calls at lead end, with:
½ = half-lead bob, pn 70
s½ = half-lead single, pn 7890
X = big bob before (pn 16, lead 4)

Contains:
Entire plain course
7 567890
5 657890
9 098765 off the front
193 LB4
113 LB5
46 xxxxxx0987/7890xxxxxx
7 xxxxx09876/67890xxxxx
38 leads in the Tittums
...and various other goodies.

===6) Mega-tittums on 10 – David Pipe and Philip Earis – 2006 onwards===
Following on from the previous composition, a much more complete tittums effect can be achieved if every consecutive bell is coursing. And whilst there had already been a trend in recent years of compositions using more tittums-style coursing orders, such as (7)65432, the “mega tittums” effect of all consecutive bells coursing was really exploited for the first time in the decade.

To easily get the bells in the mega-tittums order from the plain course, a sequence of bobs of different sizes can be used in the same carefully selected calling position (for example in royal, 8ths, 6ths and 4ths place bobs when the tenor runs out).

In a more conventional tenors-together framework, a lone 4ths place call will go into mega-tittums from coursing order 65432. The tenors-together composition below, predominantly with 8ths place bobs, illustrates things nicely.

5000 Bristol S Royal (DJP)
----------------------
V O I H 23456
- 34256
- - 45362
-* 453627089
3 - - 563427890
- - 34562
- - 46325
- - 64523
2 3 - 42356
- 23456
---------------------
* 4ths place call

The more bells there are, and the more coursing-dominated the chosen method is, the more incredible the mega-tittums effect. We’ll have to wait for 12 bells and higher stages before manifestations of the full glory of mega-tittums though…

===7) Spliced Surprise (9-14m), tenors together, atw – Richard Pearce – Summer 2001===
The decade has also seen clever arrangements of more “old school” one-part spliced royal, keeping the tenors together whilst preserving the all-the-work property.

Building on work of Roddy Horton and Graham John, Richard Pearce has created a series of tenors-together spliced in 9-14 methods on this plan.

As explained in the comprehensive ringing-theory message of December 2006 (http://www.bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2006-December/001666.html), the composition is based on sets of courses with the bells in 2nds, 5ths and 6ths rotated. This allows some familiar methods to be included, along with a change of method every lead and a fairly even method distribution.

5160 (14 methods)
23456 M W H
53462 s s R/LEGL/YSRYSRY
63452 s SR/EGLE
53426 s s G/Y/L
42365 s s - EGLE/S/G/
52364 s AKIAKIAK/DC
62354 s ND/IAKIAKIA
(52364) s K/
34265 s - CNDCN/I/
23465 - BPBPBP/
63425 s LEGLEGLE/R
42356 s s - YSRYSRY/GLEG/SRYSRYS/
(52346) s DC/
62345 s AKIAKIA/ND
52346 s CNDCNDC/K
34256 s - I/NDCNDCN/
64253 s R/B
(54236) s s PBPBP/C/
23456 s - BPBPBP/L/
400 each Cambridge, London No 3, Rutland; 360 each Anglia, Bristol, Eardleigh, Irvine, Kegworth (G), Kinross, Lincolnshire (N), Nideggen (D), Pudsey, Superlative No 2, Yorkshire; 128 com, atw.

==See Also==
*[[Compositions of the Decade 1 - Introduction]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 2 - Doubles]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 3 - Minor]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 4 - Triples]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 5 - Major]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 6 - Caters]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 8 - Cinques]]
[[Category: Composition Reviews]]

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 6 - Caters

2009-12-21T14:50:46Z

Pje24:

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 5 - Major

2009-12-21T14:50:30Z

Pje24:

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 4 - Triples

2009-12-21T14:50:13Z

Pje24:

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 3 - Minor

2009-12-21T14:49:59Z

Pje24:

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 2 - Doubles

2009-12-21T14:49:45Z

Pje24:

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 8 - Cinques

2009-12-21T14:49:15Z

Pje24: Created page with '__NOTOC__ ===A Review by Philip Earis - continued=== Cinques feels very claustrophobic at the moment, imprisoned by the irrational and still-increasing proportion of Stedman that…'

__NOTOC__
===A Review by Philip Earis - continued===
Cinques feels very claustrophobic at the moment, imprisoned by the irrational and still-increasing proportion of Stedman that is rung at this stage.

===By the numbers===
11-bell peals are up 9% over the decade compared with the 1990s. However, the real story is the method distribution within these peals.

Peals of Stedman Cinques are up 14%, and indeed now account for about 88% of rung 11-bell peals. The Stedman domination of the stage is increasing apace - peals of Grandsire are down 22% in absolute terms, falling to about 10% of rung cinques peals. Throw in a very small smattering of Erin and Plain Bob, and that completes the show. There is nothing else happening at all. No new methods, no spliced, nothing.

The decade has seen considerable compositional effort within the framework of Stedman, to be sure. Peals contain more musical rows, pay more attention to little bells, and are more varied than the simple stodgy compositional fare served up in the past: 6 and two 19s, and all that sort of thing. Cyclic patches, all “near miss” rows, and so on, seem more of a benchmark than an exceptional feature.

This progress is of course welcome, with the caveat that it’s only welcome where complexity genuinely adds value.

===Hitting the wall===
The problem is that the current direction of development gets to the point where ever-greater compositional complexity is needed, with the “reward” of arguably ever diminishing future returns. The whole thing about Stedman is that the coursing order gets disrupted by the method. This admittedly gives the advantage that it’s fairly quick to jump between any two rows – something that PABS’ turning course software and related new tools over the decade such as MBD and David Hull’s online “prickers” have helped to master.

However, the consequent disadvantage of the property that it is quick to jump between any two rows is that music in advanced Stedman compositions tends (needs?) to be all about jumping inelegantly between desired sixes, in a “chase the row” style. Lots of bobs to disrupt the flow, lots of inelegant compositional complexity, and then a fleeting effect when the desired six arrives.

As alluded to, an intrinsic property of Stedman is that it is hard to get big-bell and little-bell runs in the same course. The best Stedman compositions of the decade have tried to overcome this in neat, systematic ways with partial success, as we shall see.

However, the method will always be working against the composer.

===A new direction?===
So what to do? Well, with Stedman I feel the structure of the method naturally leads to some coursing music potential, and there remains further scope for exploiting such effects. Whilst the decade has seen a growing realisation that four consecutive bells coursing does not constitute “tittums”, proper tittums effects – which will of course propagate for more than one six – should still exist.

For example, the following course-ends (amongst many others) should give big bell coursing music around the course-end, with little-bell music around the half course.

2476839105E
2176859403E
6472859103E

However, the real key is for people to broaden their horizons. It’s not even that peals of Stedman are rung because they have a high chance of peal success. “Stedman and score” is not a phrase I’ve heard before.

Following on from the first variable cover peals in the 1990s, the present decade has seen the introduction of spliced cinques and maximus. There is no synergistic effect here. The effect that bolting Stedman onto Bristol gives is much more often parasitic.

Rather, there are unlimited new cinques method possibilities out there, unlimited glorious compositional possibilities unconstrained by falseness. Accepted wisdom is often counter-productive, and there’s no shortage of accepted thought when it comes to Stedman Cinques. More boldness is needed.

==1) Little bell Stedman==
*5074 Stedman Cinques – Philip A B Saddleton
*5000 Stedman Cinques – Mark Eccleston – July 2009
*5007 Stedman Cinques – Mark B Davies – 2003
*5004 Stedman Cinques – Michael P A Wilby – March 2005

These four compositions exemplify some of the compositional progress of the decade, showing how little bells can finally get involved in some of the action.

The cleverest is by Philip Saddleton, a valiant attempt to exploit some intrinsic properties of the method. The composition exudes intelligent design, cycling alternately through runs involving different adjacent groups of four bells in an elegant way, using short courses of 6 sixes.

Mark Eccleston’s neat composition has the footnote “contains little bell runs in every course”, which seems great until you see that said runs tend to be once a course, of the same type in the same place, achieved with blocks which keep the front six bells fixed. However, I think it would be unfair to parody this as essentially analogous to “traditional” compositions which keep the back bells fixed, though – here the back bells get to rotate through a sequence of pleasant course-ends, also.

MBD uses what he calls his “Generation Three little-bell block (Q)”. This bespoke block is used once a part to obtain maximum little-bell runs in the same courses as the conventional 78 and 87 “tittums” and 87 handstroke home big-bell positions he uses in his three-part plan.

Each repetition of the Q blocks gives the following run types:
course six runs
3 4
5 2345 back
4 4 6543 back
5
5 4
5 65432 hand
6 4 12345 back
5
7 4
5 12345 hand
8 4 65432 back
5

Mark’s Q-block is clearly well-designed, well-employed, and deserves greater attention.

Michael Wilby takes a similar approach, using a customised block to generate little-bell runs and applying it to several established back-bell positions. By introducing a few additional turning courses, he also churns out all 10 near misses, and several other notable rows.

5074 Stedman Cinques
Philip A B Saddleton

1234567890E 1 3 4 6
-----------------------
908E1234567 a
-----------------------
1490E236587 b |
----------------------- |
67E90583412 - - | |
320E9418765 - - | |
8590E761234 - - | |
14E90236587 - - | |
670E9583412 - - | |
3190E248765 - - - |A |
86E90572143 - - - - | |
230E9145678 - - - | |B
5890E674321 - - | |
41E90327856 - - | |
760E9852143 - - | |
2390E145678 - - | |
----------------------- |
57E90861342 - - - - |
140E9238765 - - - - |
8590E763412 - - |
7690E854321 A |
0E912345678 c |
-----------------------
2314567890E 3B
-----------------------
a = 9.12.13.14.15.17.18.20.21 (22)
b = 5.6.10.13.14.15 (20)
c = 1.2.5.6.7.8.12.13.14.15.17.18.21.22 (24) Start from rounds as the last row of a quick six

18 1234; 21 4321; 18 2345; 21 5432; 18 3456; 21 6543; 21 4567; 21 7654; 24 5678; 21 8765; 24 6789; 21 9876; 24 7890; 21 0987; 75 80; Each course is 6 sixes except where shown

5000 Stedman Cinques
Mark Eccleston
(3241658709E)
-----------
3241657E098 s13.s15
3241650E897 2
324165E0987 s2.s10.s13.s15
3241657E980 s2.s13
324165E7890 s10.s13.s15.s22
324165E7089 1
3241657980E 1.2.s13.s15.s22
32416587E90 2.22
3241658790E 12.14.15.16.17.18.19 (20)
3241657809E s2.s10.s13.s15
-----------
325164879E0 2.s6.s10.s13.s15
3251647E098 1.s5.13.14.s15 |
3251640E897 2.s5.s14 |
325164E0987 s2.s5.s10.13.14.s15 |
3251647E980 s2.s5.13.14 | A
325164E7890 s5.s10.13.14.s15.s22 |
325164E7089 1.s5.s14 |
3251647980E 1.2.s5.13.14.s15.s22 |
32516487E90 2.s5.s14.22 |
-----------
315264879E0 s5.9.10.s14
31526487E90 A
-----------
234165879E0 s5.s6.9.10.s14.s16
23416587E90 A
-----------
214365879E0 s5.9.10.s14
-----------
Round with a bob at 1.
Start at backstroke with rounds as the fifth row of a slow six.
First Rung: Birmingham (Cathedral) on 20 Jul 2009

5007 Stedman Cinques (#1)
Mark B Davies
2314567890E 3 6 7 9 12 14 16 18 19
---------------------------------------
12346578E90 (a)
241365 s - |
432165 s - |
314265 s - |
254163 - s s s | Q
514623 s s s |
523614 s s s s |
263154 s s s |
214365 s s s s - |
---------------------------------------
13246587E90 (b)
341265 s -
423165 s -
21537486 s - - -
12537486 s
12346587 s s s - -
21436587 Q
---------------------------------------
1324658709E (c)
341265 s -
423165 s -
21437586 s s - -
21536487 s s -
125364 s
123465 s s -
214365 Q
---------------------------------------
a = 1 5 8 9 10 11 s13 14 15 (20 sixes)
b = s2 s7 s13 s15 18
c = 2 s7 s15 18
Contains:
23 567890E, 7 near misses, 42 LB5 front & back, 79 LB4 front & back.

5004 Stedman Cinques
Michael P A Wilby
(3241658709E) 1 5 6 7 9 14 16 18 19
--------------------------------------
3241657890E 2.12.14.16.17.18.19 (20 sixes)
3124 1s.10s.18
2134 - s
--------------------------------------
14236578E90 - s - |
532461 - s s |
4352 s s - |
315264 - s s | A
314265 s s s |
325164 s s |
324165 s s s - - |
--------------------------------------
1342658790E 2.7s.9.10.13s.15.16.18s
--------------------------------------
213465E7908 7s.9s.15.16.18
324165 A*
--------------------------------------
2351748690E 3s.6.7.12.15s
123475869E0 1.6.7.9.10.16s.18
2143758609E 1.7s.9s.18
--------------------------------------
21346587E90 2s.3.9s.12.15s.18
324165 A*
--------------------------------------
2134658709E 2.7s.15s.18
324165 A*
--------------------------------------
A* = A, without - at 1

Start at backstroke with rounds as the fifth row of a slow six.
NB the first call (2) is at the first six end of the peal.
Contains all 10 near misses, tittums, and little-bell rollups.
First Rung: Birmingham Cathedral on 14 Mar 2005

==2) “All-in” Stedman Cinques – David Hull – September 2009==
Drawing on Stedman trends over the decade, many of which he instigated, David put together a “turning-course dominated” double-peal of Stedman which is a very significant challenge to call. He successfully shows that a peal can generate lots of musical rows of Stedman, with rapid transitions.

Indeed, this composition beautifully exemplifies recent Stedman cinques compositional trends, as well as simultaneously highlights both the intrinsic strengths, limitations and weaknesses of the method.

10000 Stedman Cinques
1234567890E Sixes
123456E9780 S1.4.5.6.7.9.S12.13.14.15.16.17.18 18
21E90785634 S2.S4.5.6.9.S12.13 16
7890E123456 3.4.S6.9.10 12
7864523E190 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
234567890E1 3.4.6.7.9.10 12
2310E896745 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
5193276E480 2.6.S8.S14.S16 18
5463217890E 1.2.3.5.7.9.10.11.12.16 18
23145678E90 1.7.8.9.10.11.S13.15.16 20
3421 S16.18 |
4132 S16.18 | A
1243 S16.18 |
E1089674523 S2.4.S6.S13.14.17 18
E1352749608 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
1E860492735 6.S8.9.11.13.15 16
1E234567890 4.6.9.11.13 14
1423E098765 3.S5.6.8.S10.11.14.18.20.22.25.27 28
4312 S16.18
3421 S7.S9.18
4357698E021 6.S8.9.11.13.15 16
132540E8967 2.6.9.10.11.S14.15 16
1423E975680 3.4.5.S7.8.12.13.S15.17.18 18
2134 A
213465E7908 1.2.3.4.S5.S7.S9.12.14.15.16 18
3241 A
3152648709E S10.S15.18.19
31527486 3.4.12.S17
32516487 3.4.12.17.18
231465 6.7.S9.18
3421 3.4.S12.16.17.18 |
4132 3.4.S12.16.17.18 | B
1243 3.4.S12.16.17.18 |
21E09876543 6.S8.9.11.13.15 16
E9753124680 S1.S4.5.S8.10 10
879E0123456 S1.3.7.S10 10
786452391E0 5.6.8.S11.12.13.15.16 16
E1902345678 S2.4.6.8.9.10.11.12.13.14 14
E019 18
09E1 S16.18
90E1 S16
908674523E1 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
4567890E123 3.4.6.7.9.10 12
453120E8967 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
0E123456789 3.4.6.7.9.10 12
0E978563412 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
567890E1234 3.4.6.7.9.10 12
1543E276980 S3.4.S6.S9.10.12.S15.18.19.20 20
213546798E0 1.3.4.6.9.11 12
7654321E098 3.4.S7.9.10 12
768091E3254 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
12345E67890 S1.2.3.4.S11.12.13.14 14
43125678E90 1.3.5.10.14.16.17.18 18
1423 A
9785634120E S4.S6.S8.11.12.S14 14
E0981234567 6.7.8.9.11.13.15.16.18.20.23.25 26
674523819E0 2.4.6.8.9.10.11.12.13.14 14
4362850719E 1.2.4.S6.9 10
13E29078564 6.8.10.11.13.15 16
14236587 2.S7.8.S11.S14.15 16
2134 A
4132E098765 S5.6.8.S11.12.14.18.20.22.25.27 28
1243 S16.18
2134 S7.S9.18
12537486E90 S1.5.8.11.12.13.14 16
124375869E0 S10.S19
2134 S7.S9.18
1234 S16
2134658709E 1.3.4.12.16.17
3241 B
0E869472513 S1.2.3.4.6.7.S11.12.13.S15 16
0E351729486 6.8.9.11.13.15 16
089E7654321 4.6.S9.11.13 14
2314657890E S1.S5.S7.9.10.13.S15 16
2314568790E 1.S4.5.S7.8.9.S12.S14.15.16.17.18 18
231465E7908 S1.S4.5.S7.8.9.S11.12.13.14.15.16.17.18 18
1243 A
23517496E80 3.S12.13.S16.18.19.22
Full slow six start.
Rounds in 4 changes.

===3) Stedman Cinques on a “magnificent six” plan – PABS – 2003===
One of a very small number of compositions of cinques to take a different approach, Philip Saddleton here employs the concepts of the “magnificent 6” caters / royal compositions in a 44-part cinques composition.

Stedman clearly lacks advantages of Erin here, at using the plain method to transition between a row and its reverse. The concept is right, the execution here interesting and elegant without being knock-out.

5016 Stedman Cinques by Philip A B Saddleton
(after P J Earis)
2314567890E
-----------
35179E24680 a
9807654321E b
-----------
61E72839405 b
12E34567890 a
-----------
11-part
a = 2s.4.5.7.8.11s.14.16s.20 (20)
b = 1s.4s.6.7.9s.12s.16.18 (18)
Queens; Tittums; Back rounds;

==See Also==
*[[Compositions of the Decade 1 - Introduction]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 3 - Minor]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 4 - Triples]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 5 - Major]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 6 - Caters]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 7 - Royal]]
[[Category: Composition Reviews]]

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 1 - Introduction

2009-12-21T14:42:18Z

Pje24:

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 7 - Royal

2009-12-16T17:21:28Z

Pje24:

__NOTOC__
===A Review by Philip Earis - continued===
Royal ringing has greatly improved over the decade, becoming much sharper and more focused. Progress has occurred across the board, with a shift to better established methods, the appearance of some cracking and daring new methods, and a trend towards smarter and neater “runny” compositions, without fear of conventional dogmas.

These trends have been further extrapolated with the widespread development of both cyclic compositions, along with some great new cyclic methods also. Furthermore, as we shall see other very new types of compositions have also established a foothold.

===Established Methods===
Turning first to single-method peals in established methods, the decade has enjoyed a marked transition towards better methods with more musical potential.

Ten-bell peal numbers overall seem to show a sustained rise compared with the 1990s. Peals of Yorkshire royal are up 25%.

However, the biggest trend by far has been the stratospheric rise in Bristol. There have been 718 peals of Bristol Royal published so far since the beginning of the year 2000, a massive 120% rise on the 326 from the 1990s. Peal bands around the country, perhaps especially in the North West, have been attracted to the beautiful elegance and music potential of the method, and their thirst for the nectar of musical compositions has been a force for progress.

Happily, there has also been a reduction in some of the nastier elements of 10-bell ringing. Peals of Rutland are down 37%, Pudsey down 43%, and spliced in 8 methods (which on ten almost invariably means one thing) down 24%.

===New methods – “regular”===
It has been a great decade for new royal methods. Triton Delight - quite simply London Royal with music off the front - was first pealed in May 1999, and there have subsequently been over 60 repeat performances. Whilst this is an indicator of progress, it is sadly a sign of some conductors’ intransigence that there have still been an order of magnitude more peals of London. This gap will surely be further eroded in the years ahead.

The two other great royal methods of the 1990s – Normanby Surprise, and Brave New World – set the scene for the developments of the 2000s. Neither stuck to tired and pointless limiting conventions – Normanby is a super double mx method with 3 consecutive blows, whilst Brave New World eschewed both conventional symmetry and plain bob leadheads to launch a cyclic odyssey.

The new methods of the present decade have continued and developed these trends, to impressive effect. Mark Davies has led the charge with “regular” (ie plain bob leadhead), coursing-dominated methods, including:

Black Pearl: &-5-4.5-2.3.2-9.8.9-6.7-6-1,1
Snow Tiger: &3-5.4-5-3.2-9.8-6-7.6-8.9,2
Raspberry Crumble: &3-5.4-5-3-2-8-56.4.3.2-8.9,2
Jennie’s Endeavour: &3-5.4-5-3-3478-58-6-7.6-8.9,2

Whilst there is little point in breaking conventions just for the sake of it, there is even less point in conventions existing just for the sake of it. It is good to see innovative examples of methods with 9ths in the notation above the treble, for just about the first time. These allow, inter alia, elegant double methods like Snow Tiger.

Incidentally, whilst I think I first published the figures for double method Snow Tiger (Royal), Mark claims an independent earlier discovery, and links it with his eponymous delight maximus method. The method is certainly good enough to fight over.

===New methods – cyclic glory===

In parallel to the above, the early years of the decade saw the arrival of a string of cyclic methods – ie methods with leadheads that are rotations of rounds. Cyclic methods cannot have conventional palindromic symmetry (at least not if started at the symmetry point). However, other symmetries can be used. The super new major method Anglia Cyclic (+-1-2367-1-7-5-36-4-2) employed rotational symmetry, but here on ten bells two new method stand out:

[http://ringing.org/main/pages/blueline?title=Double+Resurrection+Cyclic+Bob+Royal Double Resurrection (+-678-67-1-7-9-345-45-1-4-2)]
Spinning Jennie (&56.3-4.5.2-1-34-5.36.4-1.56.8.56.1,1)

The very simple right-place plain method Double Resurrection uses glide symmetry to great effect, whilst MBD’s Spinning Jennie cleverly is conventionally double (building on a Philip Saddleton idea), nominally with irregular leadheads, but is started at the treble snap to magically produce a clever cyclic method.

These both offer an incredibly concentrated musical experience and are really pleasurable to ring. If there’s one thing you take home from this whole series of articles, it should be to try ringing some cyclic royal.

===Composition trends===
The vast majority of royal peals rung continue to be in regular (ie plain bob leadhead) methods. And the compositions for these – both in what has been produced and in what is frequently rung - have both leapt forward over the decade.

Continuing a previous trend, little-bell runs have been very much at the fore – the progress is such that any new royal composition citing a “CRU” count would be laughed out of court. Compositional footnotes like “All courses contain little-bell music” have not only appeared, but become much more common - yardsticks, even.

Indeed, the trend towards runs has been extrapolated to cyclic compositions also - both pure cyclic 9- and 10-parts, and compositions including cyclic transitions, have featured prominently.

Cyclic compositions are especially attractive – and have become almost the default – in spliced, offering an easy yet potentially really musical way to achieve all-the-work for all the method. Indeed, the decade has seen the emergence of the first adventurous “bespoke” peals of spliced royal, with the methods customised to maximise the composition’s music, as we shall see.

Bespoke compositions have also taken off in single method peals, especially Bristol Royal. David Hull has led the way here – the method’s flexibility allows different tastes to be catered for. The trend has continued to other, less compliant methods – Graham Bradshaw has done some good work trying to squeeze music from Cambridge, for example (I haven’t selected these below, but see www.ringing.org for examples).

Clever tricks have also improved straight 14-course tenors-together compositions in single methods. Two-parts with just calls at M, W and H are very common, and many people might have thought all possibilities had been exhausted by the end of the 1990s. However, such 2-part compositions have expanded beyond just straight 1243657890 partend changes, with some interesting developments with 1654327890 partends.

Just like with major, a mixture of pencil-and-paper logic and the raw power of the SMC32 software have meant that many better royal compositions have been produced.

As an aside, I have no qualms about using the word “better” – with orchestral music, it’s very subjective and not meaningful to compare Mahler and Handel with a view to ranking them. However, change ringing’s constraints and formalisms mean that any effect (and hence any set of compositions) can be quantised in a systematic way. The only input is choosing a suitable metric to compare. Over the decade different composers’ metrics have started to converge, I feel, and whilst complete convergence is unrealistic (and arguably undesirable), there is still some way to go to avoid people talking across each other.

Moreover, royal compositions have seen much acceptance and uptake of less conventional calls, when used to good effect. Calls at 7ths, and indeed different bobs such as 16, 18, 123456 have all appeared, and also led to improvements in simple 2-part compositions.

Using multiple types of calls can be an elegant way to get all consecutive bells coursing, and other new types of compositions based on this “mega tittums” plan have made their first appearance. 10 bells are just about enough for the effect to be pronounced and effective.

===Summary===
Like standing on high ground and admiring the vista behind after a long walk, it’s an exhilarating time to survey the progress in 10-bell ringing. The march towards even higher ground needs to continue. Let’s just hope that the broader body of ringers catch up with the advances, and these are better reflected in what is actually frequently rung.

==1) Further improvements in two-part tenors-together compositions==

* Triton Delight – David Hull et al – 2003
* Yorkshire Surprise – Mark Davies - 2004

I’ve selected David’s Triton as the lead typical example of how simple tenors-together compositions have got better in recent decades. The grounds for inclusion could be questioned here – the composition is an improved tweak from Don Morrison based on the 1990s Hull little-bell classic “the fluke”, whilst the method has similarities to London (the overwork and leadhead group), but with substantially more music under the treble. Overall, though, I feel this shows what can be simply achieved which in the past simply was not achieved:

5040 Triton Delight
23456 M W H
42356 -
65324 - - -
43526 - -
25634 - -
34562 - s s
56342 - -
24365 - - -
Repeat

Touch contains:
Odd Even Total
xxxx567890 = 0 + 14 = 14
xxxx657890 = 0 + 14 = 14
xxxxxx2345 = 12 + 12 = 24
xxxxxx5432 = 12 + 12 = 24
xxxxxx3456 = 24 + 24 = 48
xxxxxx6543 = 24 + 24 = 48
0987xxxxxx = 70 + 0 = 70
7890xxxxxx = 42 + 0 = 42
2345xxxxxx = 8 + 8 = 16
5432xxxxxx = 6 + 6 = 12
3456xxxxxx = 14 + 14 = 28
6543xxxxxx = 14 + 14 = 28

MBD also claims a re-arrangement, changing two pairs of bobs for singles, but without extra musical gain. He’s on less shaky ground when he turns to Yorkshire. The composition below contains a great spread of little-bell music, both in variety of runs and in its distribution in the composition. The finish is especially nice, going from 24653 to 53246 in the last course of the peal.

In Mark’s words,

''“This is my absolute favourite conventional two-part… 3.5 courses of the last part are in LB5 coursing orders. I think it's absolutely fascinating that such a result is possible from a two-part structure: a very simple structure, too, that really just boils down to 2W 2H repeated, padded. To ring, it's possibly even better than the best one-part -very-nearly-almost as much music, plus all the fun of watching the second part unfold knowing what the first has foretold. Magic”. ''

Indeed.

5040 Yorkshire (No.1)
23456 M W H
---------------
24356 s
53462 s 2 2
46325 s s -
53624 - -
24365 - s s
---------------
2 part

Contains:
13 567890
13 657890
53 LB5
104 3456/6543
60 2345/5432
10 4567/7654

==2) Cyclic method compositions==

* Double Resurrection Cyclic Bob – Andrew Tibbetts – 2003
* Spinning Jennie Delight – David Pipe - 2003

As described above, Double Resurrection is a fantastic yet simple right-place plain cyclic method. It has an efficient structure and glide symmetry, leading to reverse runs round every half-lead, and forward runs round every leadhead.

The composition below is the first to combine the excellent “magnificent 6” rounds -> queens transition on 10 bells with the benefit of a cyclic method to fully exploit the effect. And the effect is truly mesmerising. I find it hard to fully describe its joys to those who haven’t experienced it.

1234567890 (rounds)
----------
1357924680 (queens)
1594837260 (reverse tittums)
1987654320 (reverse rounds)
1864297530 (reverse queens)
1627384950 (tittums)
1234567890 (rounds)

The plain nature of the method means that varied music appears very frequently, in a continuous “music box” demonstration. This, coupled with the rapid forward / reverse nature of the music, further magnify the effect. Both the tittums and queens block cycles (and their reverses) sound much more appealing than you might naively expect.

(Of course, when the composition is in the “reverse rounds” section, the forward runs appear around the half-lead)

The remainder of the composition consists of singled-in courses to provide a joyful variation on the theme. It’s awesome.

5040 Double Resurrection (#6)
5 6 7 8 9 234567890
ss ss s ss 324
s s 243
(a) 357924680
ss s 375
(a) 594837260
s 549
(a) 987654320
6 ss s 978
(a) 864297530
ss s 846
(a) 627384950
s 672
(b) 432567890
s 423
s s 234567890

(a)=2,s3,s5,7,8,9,s12 (12 leads)

Of course, the “magnificent six” transition can also be captured in a composition using methods with plain bob leadheads. The four-lead block 1,2,4 has been used in a number of David Hull Bristol Royal compositions to achieve this effect (more on this later), and can be extrapolated to a whole peal composition. Rob Lee put together the following:

5220 Double Coslany/10440 Bristol:

234567890
---------------------
1, 2, 4 864297530
1, 2, 4 594837260
4 602374859
2, 3, 4 972640853
2, 3, 4 342907856
s1, s8, 9 345678902
---------------------
9 part. Contains the 54 cycles of rounds, queens & tittums and reverses thereof.

This exploits the regular nature of the method, using half the plain course to join up the reverse tittums/tittums and reverse rounds/rounds positions. As Rob explains,

''“…Doing this means that some of the part ends occur at handstroke instead of backstroke, and so the 1,2,4 block is used in reverse when this is the case. Unfortunately, the cyclic part end obtained is 567890234 which means rounds occurs after 3 parts. A bit of fiddling around solves this, but at the expense of a bit of symmetry/music”''

Going back to cyclic methods, a further example of what can be achieved is with the treble-dodging method Spinning Jennie. The method is conventionally double with the following notation:

&56.3-4.5.2-1-34-5.36.4-1.56.8.56.1, 1 = 1485309627

However, ringing this starting away from the symmetry point brings up the cyclic method:

+x4.5.2x1x34x5.36.4x1.56.8.56.1.56.8.56.1x4.36.5x34x1x2.5.4x3.56.1.56.3 = 1345678902

The music isn’t as concentrated or dare I say pronounced as Resurrection, but still allows some very interesting effects. David Pipe put together the following composition, designed to bring out the runs given by the method.

5000 Spinning Jennie Delight Royal
1234567890
-------------------------------------
1543267890 s4.s4½
1452367890 3.4
1325476980 s4.s4½.s7.s9
1325476809 9
1234568709 3.4.7
1345627890 s1.3.5.s8
1436578902 3.4.7.9
1243658709 7.8 (8 leads)
1243658079 s9
1243650987 s½.8.9
1234569078 4.5.8.9
1234560987 8.9
1325460897 3.4.s9
1234567890 s½.3.4
-------------------------------------
Backstroke-snap start and finish.

Bob = 38, Single = 389 both made at the backstroke-snap.
Half-lead single = 89

There remains an opportunity for a magnificent 6 style composition here, I feel.

==3) Bespoke cyclic royal compositions – David Pipe – April 2003 / October 2003==

David Pipe’s 9-part and 10-part spliced royal compositions are a sort of contraction of his classic maximus compositions on a similar plan.

The methods in the royal peals – named after James Bond villains – are all custom-designed to yield a feast of music in the leads they appear in the composition. The new methods used, such as Goldfinger, are also intrinsically very attractive.

A link method is used to move the bells between the cyclic parts. The main block of the composition has the 2nd and the tenor of that cyclic part (so in the 9-part composition, bells 5 and 6 in the first part) alternately ringing “pivot leads”, ie the leads where they are the pivot bell.

Pivot leads are almost invariably the most musical in a method, and this structure yields a great way to ring as many plain leads in the part as possible, benefitting from an elegant palindromic structure which leads to a great balance of forward and reverse runs in each part.

Unlike maximus, a cyclic royal composition of primarily treble-dodging (single-dodging) methods needs to contain more than just the plain leads from each cyclic part to take the length over 5000 changes. In the Pipe compositions, the “padding” is based on two blocks of three bobs.

“Padding” is an unfair word as these sections are also very well-chosen, though. Custom-designed methods are again used for the best effect – for example, Kananga, which yields limited music off the front in the plain course, but much more in the 243 course in which it actually appears in the composition.

All in all, two finely crafted examples. (David Hull also has a similar, later composition containing methods with “opposite” pivot bells)

5022 Spliced Royal (8m)
234567890 Oddjob Little Alliance
-453028967 Ourumov Surprise
342590786 Zorin Surprise
-345028967 Kananga Surprise
-534028967 Scaramanga Alliance
452390786 Goldfinger Surprise
305846279 Dr No Differential Surprise
249573608 Blofeld Alliance
083657492 Blofeld Alliance
927465830 Dr No Differential Surprise
860739524 Goldfinger Surprise
796284053 Scaramanga Alliance
-867902345 Kananga Surprise
-786902345 Zorin Surprise
897264053 Ourumov Surprise
-678902345
9 part

720 each Dr No Differential S., Goldfinger S., Kananaga S.,
Ouromov S., Zorin S.; 648 each Blofeld A., Scaramanga A.;
126 Oddjob Little A.; 125 changes of method, all the work

5000 Spliced Royal (8m)
8901234567 Nick Nack
-------------------------------------
-1908674523 Largo Alliance
1897056342 Zorin Surprise
-1890674523 Kananga Surprise
-1089674523 Scaramanga Alliance
1907856342 Drax Little Alliance
1860492735 Dr No Differential
1795038264 Jaws Little Alliance
1648203957 Jaws Little Alliance
1573920486 Dr No Differential
1426385079 Drax Little Alliance
1352749608 Scaramanga Alliance
-1423567890 Kananga Surprise
-1342567890 Zorin Surprise
1453729608 Largo Alliance
-1234567890
-------------------------------------
10 part

800 Dr No Differential S, Kananga S, Zorin S; 640 Largo A; 600 Jaws Little A; 560 Drax Little A, Elektra A; 240 Nick Nack Differential Little Hybrid; 139 changes of method, All the work for all 10 bells

24 each 123456, 234567, 345678, 456789, 567890 at the back

In a related field, the late John Leary put together a series of 30 spliced royal methods in a cyclic 9-part construction. Whilst this doesn’t have the same bespoke qualities of the Pipe compositions (for example lacking a pivot-lead structure in the plain course), it contains many interesting methods and neat leads.

The composition is simply four bobs at Before to bring up the cyclic part-end 1902345678. The methods are well-structured, with some very nice new methods created for the peal (see for example Bramall Lane, b& 3-56.4-56-6-4-5.4.56.4.5-56-1, 2).

The composition was first rung (in shortened form) in 2007, and forms the basis for longer lengths of royal to be attempted shortly – sadly John isn’t around to complete his good work. The effort to expand the composition has involved some additions from David Hull and some very recent distributed further progress. Watch this space…

234567890
573920486 Beginning
648203957 Kenilworth Road
089674523 Loftus Road
860492735 Bristol
907856342 Stinking Bishop
795038264 Nideggen
426385079 Otterbourne
352749608 Bramall Lane
- 908674523 Savernake
897056342 Kegworth
069482735 Fereneze
640293857 Gresty Road
234567089 Burnden Park
352748690 Allington
573829406 St Neots
- 906482735 Burnley
698074523 Jugsholme
867950342 Kananga
785639204 Lufkin
420395678 Thimbleby
352748069 Essex
234507986 Clifton
- 904263857 Quixwood
573826049 Craven Cottage
785634290 Kings Norton
867459302 Southampton University
496082735 Goldfinger
352708964 City Ground
230597486 Stratford upon Avon
- 902345678 Elgin

===4) Further improvements in two-part tenors-together compositions – 1654327890 partends===

* Yorkshire Surprise – Mark Davies - 2002
* Yorkshire Surprise – David Pipe – 2009
* Bristol Surprise – John Warboys – c2006

Whilst many previous examples of two-part compositions involved the partend 1243657890, the decade saw the emergence of some interesting examples with a partend 1654327890.

This framework is elegant, with the clear attraction that wherever a run involving bells 2,3,4,5,6 appears in the first half of the composition, a corresponding reverse run will delight in the second half.

[This effect isn’t guaranteed in 2-parts with a 124365 partend – see for example the 2nd part of Chris Poole’s 5080 #2 (MIVMHHMW)

Mark Davies created some 2-parts of Yorkshire on this new plan in 2002, though waited 7 years before publishing (after a very tidy new DJP composition on this theme was published);

5040 Yorkshire Surprise Royal (DJP)
M W H 23456
- 2 24536
2 3 43526
- X 65432
2-part
X=16

5040 Yorkshire Surprise Royal, arr MBD (SMC32)
No.1 (local scope)
23456 M W B H
24536 - 2
53624 - x
46325 - -
24365 -
53462 - -
65432 -
2 part, x = 16

5040 Yorkshire Surprise Royal, arr MBD (SMC32)
No.2 (local scope)
M W H 23456
- - 64352
2 2 53462
s s 24365
s 23465
s - 65432
2 part

John Warboys, Don Morrison and other have also explored this effect. A simple example by John is his Bristol Royal:

5040 Bristol S. Royal
23456 V O I
35426 -
32546 2 -
46325 - 2
43652 x
65432 - -
2-part. x = 167890.
All courses contain little-bell music.

===5) Bespoke single-method compositions of Bristol Royal – David Hull – various===

Also:
* Bristol / Triton / Yorkshire – Chris Poole
* Eg Jennie’s Endeavour – Mark Davies

There are different schools of thought about Bristol Royal peal compositions. Neat tenors-together peals, especially two-parts, are well-suited to 8ths place calls. (John Warboys’ example above being just one example).

Indeed, Mark Davies goes so far to stated on his website that,

''“From a musical perspective, Bristol Royal is better with 8th's place bobs; with an average of only just over one call per course possible with 4th's place bobs, the linking possibilities are very slim, making it very hard to stay in good courses and avoid the bad. 4th's place calls are also bad news for those who like their course-end rollups”''

I feel this is too much of a generalisation. As mentioned in the introduction, Bristol Royal ringing and compositions have undergone a renaissance in the past decade. Much of this has been down to bespoke compositions, many by David Hull.

David’s use of the four-lead block 1,2,4 to achieve the magnificent six transition has already been mentioned. Similar motifs, such as the six-lead block S2.S4.S6 to act as a cyclic shunt (whilst going from forward to reverse runs) are also very well employed in his compositions.

An example well-rounded composition illustrative of the progress is:

5002 Bristol Surprise Royal (no.10)
234567890 Leads
243 SH
56342 SM.W
7654382 7ths.Out
902345678 1.3 3
987654320 7.13 21
357924680 1.2.4 4
627384950 1.2.4 4
987654230 S1.2.4 4
432567890 3.9.11 11
423 SH
(53624) M.W
24365 M.SW.SH
(42536) W.M.SW

First rung at Northallerton, 21 July 2007

It should be mentioned that various other composers have played with neat transition blocks as well. For example, Chris Poole has various nice compositions here – in Bristol he uses 7 & 8 lead courses called (3, 4½) and (2½, 4) for a cyclic shift (alternating the stroke of runs also), whilst analogous 8 & 9 lead blocks in Triton called (1, 3) also lead to notable compositions:

5160 Triton Delight Royal
234567890
----------------------------
354769820 1 3 (8)
456789023 1 3 (9)
576982043 1 3 (8)
678902345 1 3 (9)
798204365 1 3 (8)
890234567 1 3 (9)
920436587 1 3 (8)
023456789 1 3 (9)
243657089 1 4 (8)
243659078 5 (9)
243657890 4 5 (9)
34625 1 3 5 8 (8)
64523 1 (9)
35426 1 9 (9)
23456 8 (9)

As a related example, Chris has also exploited the simple effect of calling pairs of bobs on a series of bells to achieve a nice simple Yorkshire composition from 2001:

5162 Yorkshire Surprise Royal (No. 2)
234567890
--------------------------
902345678 2,10,11,19 (23)
789023456 2,10,11,19 (23)
543209876 2,10 (16)
765432098 2,10,11,19 (23)
987654320 2,10,11,19 (23)
524367890 2,10,12 (16)
(324) s5
Call paired bobs on 10-6, 6-10 followed by W sW.

Finally in this section I feel it’s appropriate to highlight an example of a bespoke composition in a great new method. I’ve selected this composition of the previously-mentioned Jennie's Endeavour Surprise Royal – both the method and composition are by Mark Davies.

The method is f-group royal with a feature that appeared a number of times in new methods over the decade: regular handstroke half-leads (so backrounds appears in the plain course at handstroke).

The consequence of this is that calls at the half-lead have the opposite effect to leadend calls. In MBD’s words,

''“This means rapid and unexpected jumps from one position to another can be carried out, and without having to trawl through undesirable leads. Part of the goal of this peal was to provide something really exciting and unpredictable, so the band never knows what is going to come up next”''

The composition makes good use of this property, utilising four types of calls to pack in a varied heap of music. The method is coursing-dominated, and to exploit this the composition also contains sections of what MBD slightly ambitiously calls “tittums” (here four consecutive bells coursing). Again, to quote the loquacious MBD,

''“Coursing orders are often revisited unexpectedly, and the same backbell positions are brought up in different ways. Both the front bells and the back bells are turned around on average more than once a course, but despite the dynamic movement the little bells remain throughout the peal in coursing orders which provide runs of varying kinds”''

5000 Jennie's Endeavour Surprise Royal
234567890
---------
65432 1 8 9 (MWH)
62345 3½ 4½ 5½ 8
43526 1 8 (MW)
435267089 4
243657890 3½ X 7½
325460987 s3½ s4 s5 s5½ 8 9
674523890 3½ s4 4½ s5 5½ 7
634527089 4 s7
234569078 s1 5
354269870 3 3½ 4½ s7½ 9
645237890 ½ s4 4½ 5½ 8½
645239078 4 5
632547890 ½ 3½ 4½ 5½ 8 8½
23456 1 (M)
---------

4th's place calls at lead end, with:
½ = half-lead bob, pn 70
s½ = half-lead single, pn 7890
X = big bob before (pn 16, lead 4)

Contains:
Entire plain course
7 567890
5 657890
9 098765 off the front
193 LB4
113 LB5
46 xxxxxx0987/7890xxxxxx
7 xxxxx09876/67890xxxxx
38 leads in the Tittums
...and various other goodies.

===6) Mega-tittums on 10 – David Pipe and Philip Earis – 2006 onwards===
Following on from the previous composition, a much more complete tittums effect can be achieved if every consecutive bell is coursing. And whilst there had already been a trend in recent years of compositions using more tittums-style coursing orders, such as (7)65432, the “mega tittums” effect of all consecutive bells coursing was really exploited for the first time in the decade.

To easily get the bells in the mega-tittums order from the plain course, a sequence of bobs of different sizes can be used in the same carefully selected calling position (for example in royal, 8ths, 6ths and 4ths place bobs when the tenor runs out).

In a more conventional tenors-together framework, a lone 4ths place call will go into mega-tittums from coursing order 65432. The tenors-together composition below, predominantly with 8ths place bobs, illustrates things nicely.

5000 Bristol S Royal (DJP)
----------------------
V O I H 23456
- 34256
- - 45362
-* 453627089
3 - - 563427890
- - 34562
- - 46325
- - 64523
2 3 - 42356
- 23456
---------------------
* 4ths place call

The more bells there are, and the more coursing-dominated the chosen method is, the more incredible the mega-tittums effect. We’ll have to wait for 12 bells and higher stages before manifestations of the full glory of mega-tittums though…

===7) Spliced Surprise (9-14m), tenors together, atw – Richard Pearce – Summer 2001===
The decade has also seen clever arrangements of more “old school” one-part spliced royal, keeping the tenors together whilst preserving the all-the-work property.

Building on work of Roddy Horton and Graham John, Richard Pearce has created a series of tenors-together spliced in 9-14 methods on this plan.

As explained in the comprehensive ringing-theory message of December 2006 (http://www.bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2006-December/001666.html), the composition is based on sets of courses with the bells in 2nds, 5ths and 6ths rotated. This allows some familiar methods to be included, along with a change of method every lead and a fairly even method distribution.

5160 (14 methods)
23456 M W H
53462 s s R/LEGL/YSRYSRY
63452 s SR/EGLE
53426 s s G/Y/L
42365 s s - EGLE/S/G/
52364 s AKIAKIAK/DC
62354 s ND/IAKIAKIA
(52364) s K/
34265 s - CNDCN/I/
23465 - BPBPBP/
63425 s LEGLEGLE/R
42356 s s - YSRYSRY/GLEG/SRYSRYS/
(52346) s DC/
62345 s AKIAKIA/ND
52346 s CNDCNDC/K
34256 s - I/NDCNDCN/
64253 s R/B
(54236) s s PBPBP/C/
23456 s - BPBPBP/L/
400 each Cambridge, London No 3, Rutland; 360 each Anglia, Bristol, Eardleigh, Irvine, Kegworth (G), Kinross, Lincolnshire (N), Nideggen (D), Pudsey, Superlative No 2, Yorkshire; 128 com, atw.

==See Also==
*[[Compositions of the Decade 1 - Introduction]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 2 - Doubles]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 3 - Minor]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 4 - Triples]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 5 - Major]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 6 - Caters]]
[[Category: Composition Reviews]]

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 7 - Royal

2009-12-16T17:14:43Z

Pje24:

__NOTOC__
===A Review by Philip Earis - continued===
Royal ringing has greatly improved over the decade, becoming much sharper and more focused. Progress has occurred across the board, with a shift to better established methods, the appearance of some cracking and daring new methods, and a trend towards smarter and neater “runny” compositions, without fear of conventional dogmas.

These trends have been further extrapolated with the widespread development of both cyclic compositions, along with some great new cyclic methods also. Furthermore, as we shall see other very new types of compositions have also established a foothold.

===Established Methods===
Turning first to single-method peals in established methods, the decade has enjoyed a marked transition towards better methods with more musical potential.

Ten-bell peal numbers overall seem to show a sustained rise compared with the 1990s. Peals of Yorkshire royal are up 25%.

However, the biggest trend by far has been the stratospheric rise in Bristol. There have been 718 peals of Bristol Royal published so far since the beginning of the year 2000, a massive 120% rise on the 326 from the 1990s. Peal bands around the country, perhaps especially in the North West, have been attracted to the beautiful elegance and music potential of the method, and their thirst for the nectar of musical compositions has been a force for progress.

Happily, there has also been a reduction in some of the nastier elements of 10-bell ringing. Peals of Rutland are down 37%, Pudsey down 43%, and spliced in 8 methods (which on ten almost invariably means one thing) down 24%.

===New methods – “regular”===
It has been a great decade for new royal methods. Triton Delight - quite simply London Royal with music off the front - was first pealed in May 1999, and there have subsequently been over 60 repeat performances. Whilst this is an indicator of progress, it is sadly a sign of some conductors’ intransigence that there have still been an order of magnitude more peals of London. This gap will surely be further eroded in the years ahead.

The two other great royal methods of the 1990s – Normanby Surprise, and Brave New World – set the scene for the developments of the 2000s. Neither stuck to tired and pointless limiting conventions – Normanby is a super double mx method with 3 consecutive blows, whilst Brave New World eschewed both conventional symmetry and plain bob leadheads to launch a cyclic odyssey.

The new methods of the present decade have continued and developed these trends, to impressive effect. Mark Davies has led the charge with “regular” (ie plain bob leadhead), coursing-dominated methods, including:

Black Pearl: &-5-4.5-2.3.2-9.8.9-6.7-6-1,1
Snow Tiger: &3-5.4-5-3.2-9.8-6-7.6-8.9,2
Raspberry Crumble: &3-5.4-5-3-2-8-56.4.3.2-8.9,2
Jennie’s Endeavour: &3-5.4-5-3-3478-58-6-7.6-8.9,2

Whilst there is little point in breaking conventions just for the sake of it, there is even less point in conventions existing just for the sake of it. It is good to see innovative examples of methods with 9ths in the notation above the treble, for just about the first time. These allow, inter alia, elegant double methods like Snow Tiger.

Incidentally, whilst I think I first published the figures for double method Snow Tiger (Royal), Mark claims an independent earlier discovery, and links it with his eponymous delight maximus method. The method is certainly good enough to fight over.

===New methods – cyclic glory===

In parallel to the above, the early years of the decade saw the arrival of a string of cyclic methods – ie methods with leadheads that are rotations of rounds. Cyclic methods cannot have conventional palindromic symmetry (at least not if started at the symmetry point). However, other symmetries can be used. The super new major method Anglia Cyclic (+-1-2367-1-7-5-36-4-2) employed rotational symmetry, but here on ten bells two new method stand out:

Double Resurrection (+-678-67-1-7-9-345-45-1-4-2)
Spinning Jennie (&56.3-4.5.2-1-34-5.36.4-1.56.8.56.1,1)

The very simple right-place plain method Double Resurrection uses glide symmetry to great effect, whilst MBD’s Spinning Jennie cleverly is conventionally double (building on a Philip Saddleton idea), nominally with irregular leadheads, but is started at the treble snap to magically produce a clever cyclic method.

These both offer an incredibly concentrated musical experience and are really pleasurable to ring. If there’s one thing you take home from this whole series of articles, it should be to try ringing some cyclic royal.

===Composition trends===
The vast majority of royal peals rung continue to be in regular (ie plain bob leadhead) methods. And the compositions for these – both in what has been produced and in what is frequently rung - have both leapt forward over the decade.

Continuing a previous trend, little-bell runs have been very much at the fore – the progress is such that any new royal composition citing a “CRU” count would be laughed out of court. Compositional footnotes like “All courses contain little-bell music” have not only appeared, but become much more common - yardsticks, even.

Indeed, the trend towards runs has been extrapolated to cyclic compositions also - both pure cyclic 9- and 10-parts, and compositions including cyclic transitions, have featured prominently.

Cyclic compositions are especially attractive – and have become almost the default – in spliced, offering an easy yet potentially really musical way to achieve all-the-work for all the method. Indeed, the decade has seen the emergence of the first adventurous “bespoke” peals of spliced royal, with the methods customised to maximise the composition’s music, as we shall see.

Bespoke compositions have also taken off in single method peals, especially Bristol Royal. David Hull has led the way here – the method’s flexibility allows different tastes to be catered for. The trend has continued to other, less compliant methods – Graham Bradshaw has done some good work trying to squeeze music from Cambridge, for example (I haven’t selected these below, but see www.ringing.org for examples).

Clever tricks have also improved straight 14-course tenors-together compositions in single methods. Two-parts with just calls at M, W and H are very common, and many people might have thought all possibilities had been exhausted by the end of the 1990s. However, such 2-part compositions have expanded beyond just straight 1243657890 partend changes, with some interesting developments with 1654327890 partends.

Just like with major, a mixture of pencil-and-paper logic and the raw power of the SMC32 software have meant that many better royal compositions have been produced.

As an aside, I have no qualms about using the word “better” – with orchestral music, it’s very subjective and not meaningful to compare Mahler and Handel with a view to ranking them. However, change ringing’s constraints and formalisms mean that any effect (and hence any set of compositions) can be quantised in a systematic way. The only input is choosing a suitable metric to compare. Over the decade different composers’ metrics have started to converge, I feel, and whilst complete convergence is unrealistic (and arguably undesirable), there is still some way to go to avoid people talking across each other.

Moreover, royal compositions have seen much acceptance and uptake of less conventional calls, when used to good effect. Calls at 7ths, and indeed different bobs such as 16, 18, 123456 have all appeared, and also led to improvements in simple 2-part compositions.

Using multiple types of calls can be an elegant way to get all consecutive bells coursing, and other new types of compositions based on this “mega tittums” plan have made their first appearance. 10 bells are just about enough for the effect to be pronounced and effective.

===Summary===
Like standing on high ground and admiring the vista behind after a long walk, it’s an exhilarating time to survey the progress in 10-bell ringing. The march towards even higher ground needs to continue. Let’s just hope that the broader body of ringers catch up with the advances, and these are better reflected in what is actually frequently rung.

==1) Further improvements in two-part tenors-together compositions==

* Triton Delight – David Hull et al – 2003
* Yorkshire Surprise – Mark Davies - 2004

I’ve selected David’s Triton as the lead typical example of how simple tenors-together compositions have got better in recent decades. The grounds for inclusion could be questioned here – the composition is an improved tweak from Don Morrison based on the 1990s Hull little-bell classic “the fluke”, whilst the method has similarities to London (the overwork and leadhead group), but with substantially more music under the treble. Overall, though, I feel this shows what can be simply achieved which in the past simply was not achieved:

5040 Triton Delight
23456 M W H
42356 -
65324 - - -
43526 - -
25634 - -
34562 - s s
56342 - -
24365 - - -
Repeat

Touch contains:
Odd Even Total
xxxx567890 = 0 + 14 = 14
xxxx657890 = 0 + 14 = 14
xxxxxx2345 = 12 + 12 = 24
xxxxxx5432 = 12 + 12 = 24
xxxxxx3456 = 24 + 24 = 48
xxxxxx6543 = 24 + 24 = 48
0987xxxxxx = 70 + 0 = 70
7890xxxxxx = 42 + 0 = 42
2345xxxxxx = 8 + 8 = 16
5432xxxxxx = 6 + 6 = 12
3456xxxxxx = 14 + 14 = 28
6543xxxxxx = 14 + 14 = 28

MBD also claims a re-arrangement, changing two pairs of bobs for singles, but without extra musical gain. He’s on less shaky ground when he turns to Yorkshire. The composition below contains a great spread of little-bell music, both in variety of runs and in its distribution in the composition. The finish is especially nice, going from 24653 to 53246 in the last course of the peal.

In Mark’s words,

''“This is my absolute favourite conventional two-part… 3.5 courses of the last part are in LB5 coursing orders. I think it's absolutely fascinating that such a result is possible from a two-part structure: a very simple structure, too, that really just boils down to 2W 2H repeated, padded. To ring, it's possibly even better than the best one-part -very-nearly-almost as much music, plus all the fun of watching the second part unfold knowing what the first has foretold. Magic”. ''

Indeed.

5040 Yorkshire (No.1)
23456 M W H
---------------
24356 s
53462 s 2 2
46325 s s -
53624 - -
24365 - s s
---------------
2 part

Contains:
13 567890
13 657890
53 LB5
104 3456/6543
60 2345/5432
10 4567/7654

==2) Cyclic method compositions==

* Double Resurrection Cyclic Bob – Andrew Tibbetts – 2003
* Spinning Jennie Delight – David Pipe - 2003

As described above, Double Resurrection is a fantastic yet simple right-place plain cyclic method. It has an efficient structure and glide symmetry, leading to reverse runs round every half-lead, and forward runs round every leadhead.

The composition below is the first to combine the excellent “magnificent 6” rounds -> queens transition on 10 bells with the benefit of a cyclic method to fully exploit the effect. And the effect is truly mesmerising. I find it hard to fully describe its joys to those who haven’t experienced it.

1234567890 (rounds)
----------
1357924680 (queens)
1594837260 (reverse tittums)
1987654320 (reverse rounds)
1864297530 (reverse queens)
1627384950 (tittums)
1234567890 (rounds)

The plain nature of the method means that varied music appears very frequently, in a continuous “music box” demonstration. This, coupled with the rapid forward / reverse nature of the music, further magnify the effect. Both the tittums and queens block cycles (and their reverses) sound much more appealing than you might naively expect.

(Of course, when the composition is in the “reverse rounds” section, the forward runs appear around the half-lead)

The remainder of the composition consists of singled-in courses to provide a joyful variation on the theme. It’s awesome.

5040 Double Resurrection (#6)
5 6 7 8 9 234567890
ss ss s ss 324
s s 243
(a) 357924680
ss s 375
(a) 594837260
s 549
(a) 987654320
6 ss s 978
(a) 864297530
ss s 846
(a) 627384950
s 672
(b) 432567890
s 423
s s 234567890

(a)=2,s3,s5,7,8,9,s12 (12 leads)

Of course, the “magnificent six” transition can also be captured in a composition using methods with plain bob leadheads. The four-lead block 1,2,4 has been used in a number of David Hull Bristol Royal compositions to achieve this effect (more on this later), and can be extrapolated to a whole peal composition. Rob Lee put together the following:

5220 Double Coslany/10440 Bristol:

234567890
---------------------
1, 2, 4 864297530
1, 2, 4 594837260
4 602374859
2, 3, 4 972640853
2, 3, 4 342907856
s1, s8, 9 345678902
---------------------
9 part. Contains the 54 cycles of rounds, queens & tittums and reverses thereof.

This exploits the regular nature of the method, using half the plain course to join up the reverse tittums/tittums and reverse rounds/rounds positions. As Rob explains,

''“…Doing this means that some of the part ends occur at handstroke instead of backstroke, and so the 1,2,4 block is used in reverse when this is the case. Unfortunately, the cyclic part end obtained is 567890234 which means rounds occurs after 3 parts. A bit of fiddling around solves this, but at the expense of a bit of symmetry/music”''

Going back to cyclic methods, a further example of what can be achieved is with the treble-dodging method Spinning Jennie. The method is conventionally double with the following notation:

&56.3-4.5.2-1-34-5.36.4-1.56.8.56.1, 1 = 1485309627

However, ringing this starting away from the symmetry point brings up the cyclic method:

+x4.5.2x1x34x5.36.4x1.56.8.56.1.56.8.56.1x4.36.5x34x1x2.5.4x3.56.1.56.3 = 1345678902

The music isn’t as concentrated or dare I say pronounced as Resurrection, but still allows some very interesting effects. David Pipe put together the following composition, designed to bring out the runs given by the method.

5000 Spinning Jennie Delight Royal
1234567890
-------------------------------------
1543267890 s4.s4½
1452367890 3.4
1325476980 s4.s4½.s7.s9
1325476809 9
1234568709 3.4.7
1345627890 s1.3.5.s8
1436578902 3.4.7.9
1243658709 7.8 (8 leads)
1243658079 s9
1243650987 s½.8.9
1234569078 4.5.8.9
1234560987 8.9
1325460897 3.4.s9
1234567890 s½.3.4
-------------------------------------
Backstroke-snap start and finish.

Bob = 38, Single = 389 both made at the backstroke-snap.
Half-lead single = 89

There remains an opportunity for a magnificent 6 style composition here, I feel.

==3) Bespoke cyclic royal compositions – David Pipe – April 2003 / October 2003==

David Pipe’s 9-part and 10-part spliced royal compositions are a sort of contraction of his classic maximus compositions on a similar plan.

The methods in the royal peals – named after James Bond villains – are all custom-designed to yield a feast of music in the leads they appear in the composition. The new methods used, such as Goldfinger, are also intrinsically very attractive.

A link method is used to move the bells between the cyclic parts. The main block of the composition has the 2nd and the tenor of that cyclic part (so in the 9-part composition, bells 5 and 6 in the first part) alternately ringing “pivot leads”, ie the leads where they are the pivot bell.

Pivot leads are almost invariably the most musical in a method, and this structure yields a great way to ring as many plain leads in the part as possible, benefitting from an elegant palindromic structure which leads to a great balance of forward and reverse runs in each part.

Unlike maximus, a cyclic royal composition of primarily treble-dodging (single-dodging) methods needs to contain more than just the plain leads from each cyclic part to take the length over 5000 changes. In the Pipe compositions, the “padding” is based on two blocks of three bobs.

“Padding” is an unfair word as these sections are also very well-chosen, though. Custom-designed methods are again used for the best effect – for example, Kananga, which yields limited music off the front in the plain course, but much more in the 243 course in which it actually appears in the composition.

All in all, two finely crafted examples. (David Hull also has a similar, later composition containing methods with “opposite” pivot bells)

5022 Spliced Royal (8m)
234567890 Oddjob Little Alliance
-453028967 Ourumov Surprise
342590786 Zorin Surprise
-345028967 Kananga Surprise
-534028967 Scaramanga Alliance
452390786 Goldfinger Surprise
305846279 Dr No Differential Surprise
249573608 Blofeld Alliance
083657492 Blofeld Alliance
927465830 Dr No Differential Surprise
860739524 Goldfinger Surprise
796284053 Scaramanga Alliance
-867902345 Kananga Surprise
-786902345 Zorin Surprise
897264053 Ourumov Surprise
-678902345
9 part

720 each Dr No Differential S., Goldfinger S., Kananaga S.,
Ouromov S., Zorin S.; 648 each Blofeld A., Scaramanga A.;
126 Oddjob Little A.; 125 changes of method, all the work

5000 Spliced Royal (8m)
8901234567 Nick Nack
-------------------------------------
-1908674523 Largo Alliance
1897056342 Zorin Surprise
-1890674523 Kananga Surprise
-1089674523 Scaramanga Alliance
1907856342 Drax Little Alliance
1860492735 Dr No Differential
1795038264 Jaws Little Alliance
1648203957 Jaws Little Alliance
1573920486 Dr No Differential
1426385079 Drax Little Alliance
1352749608 Scaramanga Alliance
-1423567890 Kananga Surprise
-1342567890 Zorin Surprise
1453729608 Largo Alliance
-1234567890
-------------------------------------
10 part

800 Dr No Differential S, Kananga S, Zorin S; 640 Largo A; 600 Jaws Little A; 560 Drax Little A, Elektra A; 240 Nick Nack Differential Little Hybrid; 139 changes of method, All the work for all 10 bells

24 each 123456, 234567, 345678, 456789, 567890 at the back

In a related field, the late John Leary put together a series of 30 spliced royal methods in a cyclic 9-part construction. Whilst this doesn’t have the same bespoke qualities of the Pipe compositions (for example lacking a pivot-lead structure in the plain course), it contains many interesting methods and neat leads.

The composition is simply four bobs at Before to bring up the cyclic part-end 1902345678. The methods are well-structured, with some very nice new methods created for the peal (see for example Bramall Lane, b& 3-56.4-56-6-4-5.4.56.4.5-56-1, 2).

The composition was first rung (in shortened form) in 2007, and forms the basis for longer lengths of royal to be attempted shortly – sadly John isn’t around to complete his good work. The effort to expand the composition has involved some additions from David Hull and some very recent distributed further progress. Watch this space…

234567890
573920486 Beginning
648203957 Kenilworth Road
089674523 Loftus Road
860492735 Bristol
907856342 Stinking Bishop
795038264 Nideggen
426385079 Otterbourne
352749608 Bramall Lane
- 908674523 Savernake
897056342 Kegworth
069482735 Fereneze
640293857 Gresty Road
234567089 Burnden Park
352748690 Allington
573829406 St Neots
- 906482735 Burnley
698074523 Jugsholme
867950342 Kananga
785639204 Lufkin
420395678 Thimbleby
352748069 Essex
234507986 Clifton
- 904263857 Quixwood
573826049 Craven Cottage
785634290 Kings Norton
867459302 Southampton University
496082735 Goldfinger
352708964 City Ground
230597486 Stratford upon Avon
- 902345678 Elgin

===4) Further improvements in two-part tenors-together compositions – 1654327890 partends===

* Yorkshire Surprise – Mark Davies - 2002
* Yorkshire Surprise – David Pipe – 2009
* Bristol Surprise – John Warboys – c2006

Whilst many previous examples of two-part compositions involved the partend 1243657890, the decade saw the emergence of some interesting examples with a partend 1654327890.

This framework is elegant, with the clear attraction that wherever a run involving bells 2,3,4,5,6 appears in the first half of the composition, a corresponding reverse run will delight in the second half.

[This effect isn’t guaranteed in 2-parts with a 124365 partend – see for example the 2nd part of Chris Poole’s 5080 #2 (MIVMHHMW)

Mark Davies created some 2-parts of Yorkshire on this new plan in 2002, though waited 7 years before publishing (after a very tidy new DJP composition on this theme was published);

5040 Yorkshire Surprise Royal (DJP)
M W H 23456
- 2 24536
2 3 43526
- X 65432
2-part
X=16

5040 Yorkshire Surprise Royal, arr MBD (SMC32)
No.1 (local scope)
23456 M W B H
24536 - 2
53624 - x
46325 - -
24365 -
53462 - -
65432 -
2 part, x = 16

5040 Yorkshire Surprise Royal, arr MBD (SMC32)
No.2 (local scope)
M W H 23456
- - 64352
2 2 53462
s s 24365
s 23465
s - 65432
2 part

John Warboys, Don Morrison and other have also explored this effect. A simple example by John is his Bristol Royal:

5040 Bristol S. Royal
23456 V O I
35426 -
32546 2 -
46325 - 2
43652 x
65432 - -
2-part. x = 167890.
All courses contain little-bell music.

===5) Bespoke single-method compositions of Bristol Royal – David Hull – various===

Also:
* Bristol / Triton / Yorkshire – Chris Poole
* Eg Jennie’s Endeavour – Mark Davies

There are different schools of thought about Bristol Royal peal compositions. Neat tenors-together peals, especially two-parts, are well-suited to 8ths place calls. (John Warboys’ example above being just one example).

Indeed, Mark Davies goes so far to stated on his website that,

''“From a musical perspective, Bristol Royal is better with 8th's place bobs; with an average of only just over one call per course possible with 4th's place bobs, the linking possibilities are very slim, making it very hard to stay in good courses and avoid the bad. 4th's place calls are also bad news for those who like their course-end rollups”''

I feel this is too much of a generalisation. As mentioned in the introduction, Bristol Royal ringing and compositions have undergone a renaissance in the past decade. Much of this has been down to bespoke compositions, many by David Hull.

David’s use of the four-lead block 1,2,4 to achieve the magnificent six transition has already been mentioned. Similar motifs, such as the six-lead block S2.S4.S6 to act as a cyclic shunt (whilst going from forward to reverse runs) are also very well employed in his compositions.

An example well-rounded composition illustrative of the progress is:

5002 Bristol Surprise Royal (no.10)
234567890 Leads
243 SH
56342 SM.W
7654382 7ths.Out
902345678 1.3 3
987654320 7.13 21
357924680 1.2.4 4
627384950 1.2.4 4
987654230 S1.2.4 4
432567890 3.9.11 11
423 SH
(53624) M.W
24365 M.SW.SH
(42536) W.M.SW

First rung at Northallerton, 21 July 2007

It should be mentioned that various other composers have played with neat transition blocks as well. For example, Chris Poole has various nice compositions here – in Bristol he uses 7 & 8 lead courses called (3, 4½) and (2½, 4) for a cyclic shift (alternating the stroke of runs also), whilst analogous 8 & 9 lead blocks in Triton called (1, 3) also lead to notable compositions:

5160 Triton Delight Royal
234567890
----------------------------
354769820 1 3 (8)
456789023 1 3 (9)
576982043 1 3 (8)
678902345 1 3 (9)
798204365 1 3 (8)
890234567 1 3 (9)
920436587 1 3 (8)
023456789 1 3 (9)
243657089 1 4 (8)
243659078 5 (9)
243657890 4 5 (9)
34625 1 3 5 8 (8)
64523 1 (9)
35426 1 9 (9)
23456 8 (9)

As a related example, Chris has also exploited the simple effect of calling pairs of bobs on a series of bells to achieve a nice simple Yorkshire composition from 2001:

5162 Yorkshire Surprise Royal (No. 2)
234567890
--------------------------
902345678 2,10,11,19 (23)
789023456 2,10,11,19 (23)
543209876 2,10 (16)
765432098 2,10,11,19 (23)
987654320 2,10,11,19 (23)
524367890 2,10,12 (16)
(324) s5
Call paired bobs on 10-6, 6-10 followed by W sW.

Finally in this section I feel it’s appropriate to highlight an example of a bespoke composition in a great new method. I’ve selected this composition of the previously-mentioned Jennie's Endeavour Surprise Royal – both the method and composition are by Mark Davies.

The method is f-group royal with a feature that appeared a number of times in new methods over the decade: regular handstroke half-leads (so backrounds appears in the plain course at handstroke).

The consequence of this is that calls at the half-lead have the opposite effect to leadend calls. In MBD’s words,

''“This means rapid and unexpected jumps from one position to another can be carried out, and without having to trawl through undesirable leads. Part of the goal of this peal was to provide something really exciting and unpredictable, so the band never knows what is going to come up next”''

The composition makes good use of this property, utilising four types of calls to pack in a varied heap of music. The method is coursing-dominated, and to exploit this the composition also contains sections of what MBD slightly ambitiously calls “tittums” (here four consecutive bells coursing). Again, to quote the loquacious MBD,

''“Coursing orders are often revisited unexpectedly, and the same backbell positions are brought up in different ways. Both the front bells and the back bells are turned around on average more than once a course, but despite the dynamic movement the little bells remain throughout the peal in coursing orders which provide runs of varying kinds”''

5000 Jennie's Endeavour Surprise Royal
234567890
---------
65432 1 8 9 (MWH)
62345 3½ 4½ 5½ 8
43526 1 8 (MW)
435267089 4
243657890 3½ X 7½
325460987 s3½ s4 s5 s5½ 8 9
674523890 3½ s4 4½ s5 5½ 7
634527089 4 s7
234569078 s1 5
354269870 3 3½ 4½ s7½ 9
645237890 ½ s4 4½ 5½ 8½
645239078 4 5
632547890 ½ 3½ 4½ 5½ 8 8½
23456 1 (M)
---------

4th's place calls at lead end, with:
½ = half-lead bob, pn 70
s½ = half-lead single, pn 7890
X = big bob before (pn 16, lead 4)

Contains:
Entire plain course
7 567890
5 657890
9 098765 off the front
193 LB4
113 LB5
46 xxxxxx0987/7890xxxxxx
7 xxxxx09876/67890xxxxx
38 leads in the Tittums
...and various other goodies.

===6) Mega-tittums on 10 – David Pipe and Philip Earis – 2006 onwards===
Following on from the previous composition, a much more complete tittums effect can be achieved if every consecutive bell is coursing. And whilst there had already been a trend in recent years of compositions using more tittums-style coursing orders, such as (7)65432, the “mega tittums” effect of all consecutive bells coursing was really exploited for the first time in the decade.

To easily get the bells in the mega-tittums order from the plain course, a sequence of bobs of different sizes can be used in the same carefully selected calling position (for example in royal, 8ths, 6ths and 4ths place bobs when the tenor runs out).

In a more conventional tenors-together framework, a lone 4ths place call will go into mega-tittums from coursing order 65432. The tenors-together composition below, predominantly with 8ths place bobs, illustrates things nicely.

5000 Bristol S Royal (DJP)
----------------------
V O I H 23456
- 34256
- - 45362
-* 453627089
3 - - 563427890
- - 34562
- - 46325
- - 64523
2 3 - 42356
- 23456
---------------------
* 4ths place call

The more bells there are, and the more coursing-dominated the chosen method is, the more incredible the mega-tittums effect. We’ll have to wait for 12 bells and higher stages before manifestations of the full glory of mega-tittums though…

===7) Spliced Surprise (9-14m), tenors together, atw – Richard Pearce – Summer 2001===
The decade has also seen clever arrangements of more “old school” one-part spliced royal, keeping the tenors together whilst preserving the all-the-work property.

Building on work of Roddy Horton and Graham John, Richard Pearce has created a series of tenors-together spliced in 9-14 methods on this plan.

As explained in the comprehensive ringing-theory message of December 2006 (http://www.bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2006-December/001666.html), the composition is based on sets of courses with the bells in 2nds, 5ths and 6ths rotated. This allows some familiar methods to be included, along with a change of method every lead and a fairly even method distribution.

5160 (14 methods)
23456 M W H
53462 s s R/LEGL/YSRYSRY
63452 s SR/EGLE
53426 s s G/Y/L
42365 s s - EGLE/S/G/
52364 s AKIAKIAK/DC
62354 s ND/IAKIAKIA
(52364) s K/
34265 s - CNDCN/I/
23465 - BPBPBP/
63425 s LEGLEGLE/R
42356 s s - YSRYSRY/GLEG/SRYSRYS/
(52346) s DC/
62345 s AKIAKIA/ND
52346 s CNDCNDC/K
34256 s - I/NDCNDCN/
64253 s R/B
(54236) s s PBPBP/C/
23456 s - BPBPBP/L/
400 each Cambridge, London No 3, Rutland; 360 each Anglia, Bristol, Eardleigh, Irvine, Kegworth (G), Kinross, Lincolnshire (N), Nideggen (D), Pudsey, Superlative No 2, Yorkshire; 128 com, atw.

==See Also==
*[[Compositions of the Decade 1 - Introduction]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 2 - Doubles]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 3 - Minor]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 4 - Triples]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 5 - Major]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 6 - Caters]]
[[Category: Composition Reviews]]

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 6 - Caters

2009-12-16T16:35:34Z

Pje24:

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 5 - Major

2009-12-16T16:35:17Z

Pje24:

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 4 - Triples

2009-12-16T16:34:41Z

Pje24:

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 3 - Minor

2009-12-16T16:34:21Z

Pje24:

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 2 - Doubles

2009-12-16T16:34:03Z

Pje24:

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 7 - Royal

2009-12-16T16:33:33Z

Pje24:

__NOTOC__
===A Review by Philip Earis - continued===
Royal ringing has greatly improved over the decade, becoming much sharper and more focused. Progress has occurred across the board, with a shift to better established methods, the appearance of some cracking and daring new methods, and a trend towards smarter and neater “runny” compositions, without fear of conventional dogmas.

These trends have been further extrapolated with the widespread development of both cyclic compositions, along with some great new cyclic methods also. Furthermore, as we shall see other very new types of compositions have also established a foothold.

===Established Methods===
Turning first to single-method peals in established methods, the decade has enjoyed a marked transition towards better methods with more musical potential.

Ten-bell peal numbers overall seem to show a sustained rise compared with the 1990s. Peals of Yorkshire royal are up 25%.

However, the biggest trend by far has been the stratospheric rise in Bristol. There have been 718 peals of Bristol Royal published so far since the beginning of the year 2000, a massive 120% rise on the 326 from the 1990s. Peal bands around the country, perhaps especially in the North West, have been attracted to the beautiful elegance and music potential of the method, and their thirst for the nectar of musical compositions has been a force for progress.

Happily, there has also been a reduction in some of the nastier elements of 10-bell ringing. Peals of Rutland are down 37%, Pudsey down 43%, and spliced in 8 methods (which on ten almost invariably means one thing) down 24%.

===New methods – “regular”===
It has been a great decade for new royal methods. Triton Delight - quite simply London Royal with music off the front - was first pealed in May 1999, and there have subsequently been over 60 repeat performances. Whilst this is an indicator of progress, it is sadly a sign of some conductors’ intransigence that there have still been an order of magnitude more peals of London. This gap will surely be further eroded in the years ahead.

The two other great royal methods of the 1990s – Normanby Surprise, and Brave New World – set the scene for the developments of the 2000s. Neither stuck to tired and pointless limiting conventions – Normanby is a super double mx method with 3 consecutive blows, whilst Brave New World eschewed both conventional symmetry and plain bob leadheads to launch a cyclic odyssey.

The new methods of the present decade have continued and developed these trends, to impressive effect. Mark Davies has led the charge with “regular” (ie plain bob leadhead), coursing-dominated methods, including:

Black Pearl: &-5-4.5-2.3.2-9.8.9-6.7-6-1,1
Snow Tiger: &3-5.4-5-3.2-9.8-6-7.6-8.9,2
Raspberry Crumble: &3-5.4-5-3-2-8-56.4.3.2-8.9,2
Jennie’s Endeavour: &3-5.4-5-3-3478-58-6-7.6-8.9,2

Whilst there is little point in breaking conventions just for the sake of it, there is even less point in conventions existing just for the sake of it. It is good to see innovative examples of methods with 9ths in the notation above the treble, for just about the first time. These allow, inter alia, elegant double methods like Snow Tiger.

Incidentally, whilst I think I first published the figures for double method Snow Tiger (Royal), Mark claims an independent earlier discovery, and links it with his eponymous delight maximus method. The method is certainly good enough to fight over.

===New methods – cyclic glory===

In parallel to the above, the early years of the decade saw the arrival of a string of cyclic methods – ie methods with leadheads that are rotations of rounds. Cyclic methods cannot have conventional palindromic symmetry (at least not if started at the symmetry point). However, other symmetries can be used. The super new major method Anglia Cyclic (+-1-2367-1-7-5-36-4-2) employed rotational symmetry, but here on ten bells two new method stand out:

Double Resurrection (+-678-67-1-7-9-345-45-1-4-2)
Spinning Jennie (&56.3-4.5.2-1-34-5.36.4-1.56.8.56.1,1)

The very simple right-place plain method Double Resurrection uses glide symmetry to great effect, whilst MBD’s Spinning Jennie cleverly is conventionally double (building on a Philip Saddleton idea), nominally with irregular leadheads, but is started at the treble snap to magically produce a clever cyclic method.

These both offer an incredibly concentrated musical experience and are really pleasurable to ring. If there’s one thing you take home from this whole series of articles, it should be to try ringing some cyclic royal.

===Composition trends===
The vast majority of royal peals rung continue to be in regular (ie plain bob leadhead) methods. And the compositions for these – both in what has been produced and in what is frequently rung - have both leapt forward over the decade.

Continuing a previous trend, little-bell runs have been very much at the fore – the progress is such that any new royal composition citing a “CRU” count would be laughed out of court. Compositional footnotes like “All courses contain little-bell music” have not only appeared, but become much more common - yardsticks, even.

Indeed, the trend towards runs has been extrapolated to cyclic compositions also - both pure cyclic 9- and 10-parts, and compositions including cyclic transitions, have featured prominently.

Cyclic compositions are especially attractive – and have become almost the default – in spliced, offering an easy yet potentially really musical way to achieve all-the-work for all the method. Indeed, the decade has seen the emergence of the first adventurous “bespoke” peals of spliced royal, with the methods customised to maximise the composition’s music, as we shall see.

Bespoke compositions have also taken off in single method peals, especially Bristol Royal. David Hull has led the way here – the method’s flexibility allows different tastes to be catered for. The trend has continued to other, less compliant methods – Graham Bradshaw has done some good work trying to squeeze music from Cambridge, for example (I haven’t selected these below, but see www.ringing.org for examples).

Clever tricks have also improved straight 14-course tenors-together compositions in single methods. Two-parts with just calls at M, W and H are very common, and many people might have thought all possibilities had been exhausted by the end of the 1990s. However, such 2-part compositions have expanded beyond just straight 1243657890 partend changes, with some interesting developments with 1654327890 partends.

Just like with major, a mixture of pencil-and-paper logic and the raw power of the SMC32 software have meant that many better royal compositions have been produced.

As an aside, I have no qualms about using the word “better” – with orchestral music, it’s very subjective and not meaningful to compare Mahler and Handel with a view to ranking them. However, change ringing’s constraints and formalisms mean that any effect (and hence any set of compositions) can be quantised in a systematic way. The only input is choosing a suitable metric to compare. Over the decade different composers’ metrics have started to converge, I feel, and whilst complete convergence is unrealistic (and arguably undesirable), there is still some way to go to avoid people talking across each other.

Moreover, royal compositions have seen much acceptance and uptake of less conventional calls, when used to good effect. Calls at 7ths, and indeed different bobs such as 16, 18, 123456 have all appeared, and also led to improvements in simple 2-part compositions.

Using multiple types of calls can be an elegant way to get all consecutive bells coursing, and other new types of compositions based on this “mega tittums” plan have made their first appearance. 10 bells are just about enough for the effect to be pronounced and effective.

===Summary===
Like standing on high ground and admiring the vista behind after a long walk, it’s an exhilarating time to survey the progress in 10-bell ringing. The march towards even higher ground needs to continue. Let’s just hope that the broader body of ringers catch up with the advances, and these are better reflected in what is actually frequently rung.

==1) Further improvements in two-part tenors-together compositions==

* Triton Delight – David Hull et al – 2003
* Yorkshire Surprise – Mark Davies - 2004

I’ve selected David’s Triton as the lead typical example of how simple tenors-together compositions have got better in recent decades. The grounds for inclusion could be questioned here – the composition is an improved tweak from Don Morrison based on the 1990s Hull little-bell classic “the fluke”, whilst the method has similarities to London (the overwork and leadhead group), but with substantially more music under the treble. Overall, though, I feel this shows what can be simply achieved which in the past simply was not achieved:

5040 Triton Delight
23456 M W H
42356 -
65324 - - -
43526 - -
25634 - -
34562 - s s
56342 - -
24365 - - -
Repeat

Touch contains:
Odd Even Total
xxxx567890 = 0 + 14 = 14
xxxx657890 = 0 + 14 = 14
xxxxxx2345 = 12 + 12 = 24
xxxxxx5432 = 12 + 12 = 24
xxxxxx3456 = 24 + 24 = 48
xxxxxx6543 = 24 + 24 = 48
0987xxxxxx = 70 + 0 = 70
7890xxxxxx = 42 + 0 = 42
2345xxxxxx = 8 + 8 = 16
5432xxxxxx = 6 + 6 = 12
3456xxxxxx = 14 + 14 = 28
6543xxxxxx = 14 + 14 = 28

MBD also claims a re-arrangement, changing two pairs of bobs for singles, but without extra musical gain. He’s on less shaky ground when he turns to Yorkshire. The composition below contains a great spread of little-bell music, both in variety of runs and in its distribution in the composition. The finish is especially nice, going from 24653 to 53246 in the last course of the peal.

In Mark’s words,

''“This is my absolute favourite conventional two-part… 3.5 courses of the last part are in LB5 coursing orders. I think it's absolutely fascinating that such a result is possible from a two-part structure: a very simple structure, too, that really just boils down to 2W 2H repeated, padded. To ring, it's possibly even better than the best one-part -very-nearly-almost as much music, plus all the fun of watching the second part unfold knowing what the first has foretold. Magic”. ''

Indeed.

5040 Yorkshire (No.1)
23456 M W H
---------------
24356 s
53462 s 2 2
46325 s s -
53624 - -
24365 - s s
---------------
2 part

Contains:
13 567890
13 657890
53 LB5
104 3456/6543
60 2345/5432
10 4567/7654

==2) Cyclic method compositions==

* Double Resurrection Cyclic Bob – Andrew Tibbetts – 2003
* Spinning Jennie Delight – David Pipe - 2003

As described above, Double Resurrection is a fantastic yet simple right-place plain cyclic method. It has an efficient structure and glide symmetry, leading to reverse runs round every half-lead, and forward runs round every leadhead.

The composition below is the first to combine the excellent “magnificent 6” rounds -> queens transition on 10 bells with the benefit of a cyclic method to fully exploit the effect. And the effect is truly mesmerising. I find it hard to fully describe its joys to those who haven’t experienced it.

1234567890 (rounds)
----------
1357924680 (queens)
1594837260 (reverse tittums)
1987654320 (reverse rounds)
1864297530 (reverse queens)
1627384950 (tittums)
1234567890 (rounds)

The plain nature of the method means that varied music appears very frequently, in a continuous “music box” demonstration. This, coupled with the rapid forward / reverse nature of the music, further magnify the effect. Both the tittums and queens block cycles (and their reverses) sound much more appealing than you might naively expect.

(Of course, when the composition is in the “reverse rounds” section, the forward runs appear around the half-lead)

The remainder of the composition consists of singled-in courses to provide a joyful variation on the theme. It’s awesome.

5040 Double Resurrection (#6)
5 6 7 8 9 234567890
ss ss s ss 324
s s 243
(a) 357924680
ss s 375
(a) 594837260
s 549
(a) 987654320
6 ss s 978
(a) 864297530
ss s 846
(a) 627384950
s 672
(b) 432567890
s 423
s s 234567890

(a)=2,s3,s5,7,8,9,s12 (12 leads)

Of course, the “magnificent six” transition can also be captured in a composition using methods with plain bob leadheads. The four-lead block 1,2,4 has been used in a number of David Hull Bristol Royal compositions to achieve this effect (more on this later), and can be extrapolated to a whole peal composition. Rob Lee put together the following:

5220 Double Coslany/10440 Bristol:

234567890
---------------------
1, 2, 4 864297530
1, 2, 4 594837260
4 602374859
2, 3, 4 972640853
2, 3, 4 342907856
s1, s8, 9 345678902
---------------------
9 part. Contains the 54 cycles of rounds, queens & tittums and reverses thereof.

This exploits the regular nature of the method, using half the plain course to join up the reverse tittums/tittums and reverse rounds/rounds positions. As Rob explains,

''“…Doing this means that some of the part ends occur at handstroke instead of backstroke, and so the 1,2,4 block is used in reverse when this is the case. Unfortunately, the cyclic part end obtained is 567890234 which means rounds occurs after 3 parts. A bit of fiddling around solves this, but at the expense of a bit of symmetry/music”''

Going back to cyclic methods, a further example of what can be achieved is with the treble-dodging method Spinning Jennie. The method is conventionally double with the following notation:

&56.3-4.5.2-1-34-5.36.4-1.56.8.56.1, 1 = 1485309627

However, ringing this starting away from the symmetry point brings up the cyclic method:

+x4.5.2x1x34x5.36.4x1.56.8.56.1.56.8.56.1x4.36.5x34x1x2.5.4x3.56.1.56.3 = 1345678902

The music isn’t as concentrated or dare I say pronounced as Resurrection, but still allows some very interesting effects. David Pipe put together the following composition, designed to bring out the runs given by the method.

5000 Spinning Jennie Delight Royal
1234567890
-------------------------------------
1543267890 s4.s4½
1452367890 3.4
1325476980 s4.s4½.s7.s9
1325476809 9
1234568709 3.4.7
1345627890 s1.3.5.s8
1436578902 3.4.7.9
1243658709 7.8 (8 leads)
1243658079 s9
1243650987 s½.8.9
1234569078 4.5.8.9
1234560987 8.9
1325460897 3.4.s9
1234567890 s½.3.4
-------------------------------------
Backstroke-snap start and finish.

Bob = 38, Single = 389 both made at the backstroke-snap.
Half-lead single = 89

There remains an opportunity for a magnificent 6 style composition here, I feel.

==3) Bespoke cyclic royal compositions – David Pipe – April 2003 / October 2003==

David Pipe’s 9-part and 10-part spliced royal compositions are a sort of contraction of his classic maximus compositions on a similar plan.

The methods in the royal peals – named after James Bond villains – are all custom-designed to yield a feast of music in the leads they appear in the composition. The new methods used, such as Goldfinger, are also intrinsically very attractive.

A link method is used to move the bells between the cyclic parts. The main block of the composition has the 2nd and the tenor of that cyclic part (so in the 9-part composition, bells 5 and 6 in the first part) alternately ringing “pivot leads”, ie the leads where they are the pivot bell.

Pivot leads are almost invariably the most musical in a method, and this structure yields a great way to ring as many plain leads in the part as possible, benefitting from an elegant palindromic structure which leads to a great balance of forward and reverse runs in each part.

Unlike maximus, a cyclic royal composition of primarily treble-dodging (single-dodging) methods needs to contain more than just the plain leads from each cyclic part to take the length over 5000 changes. In the Pipe compositions, the “padding” is based on two blocks of three bobs.

“Padding” is an unfair word as these sections are also very well-chosen, though. Custom-designed methods are again used for the best effect – for example, Kananga, which yields limited music off the front in the plain course, but much more in the 243 course in which it actually appears in the composition.

All in all, two finely crafted examples. (David Hull also has a similar, later composition containing methods with “opposite” pivot bells)

5022 Spliced Royal (8m)
234567890 Oddjob Little Alliance
-453028967 Ourumov Surprise
342590786 Zorin Surprise
-345028967 Kananga Surprise
-534028967 Scaramanga Alliance
452390786 Goldfinger Surprise
305846279 Dr No Differential Surprise
249573608 Blofeld Alliance
083657492 Blofeld Alliance
927465830 Dr No Differential Surprise
860739524 Goldfinger Surprise
796284053 Scaramanga Alliance
-867902345 Kananga Surprise
-786902345 Zorin Surprise
897264053 Ourumov Surprise
-678902345
9 part

720 each Dr No Differential S., Goldfinger S., Kananaga S.,
Ouromov S., Zorin S.; 648 each Blofeld A., Scaramanga A.;
126 Oddjob Little A.; 125 changes of method, all the work

5000 Spliced Royal (8m)
8901234567 Nick Nack
-------------------------------------
-1908674523 Largo Alliance
1897056342 Zorin Surprise
-1890674523 Kananga Surprise
-1089674523 Scaramanga Alliance
1907856342 Drax Little Alliance
1860492735 Dr No Differential
1795038264 Jaws Little Alliance
1648203957 Jaws Little Alliance
1573920486 Dr No Differential
1426385079 Drax Little Alliance
1352749608 Scaramanga Alliance
-1423567890 Kananga Surprise
-1342567890 Zorin Surprise
1453729608 Largo Alliance
-1234567890
-------------------------------------
10 part

800 Dr No Differential S, Kananga S, Zorin S; 640 Largo A; 600 Jaws Little A; 560 Drax Little A, Elektra A; 240 Nick Nack Differential Little Hybrid; 139 changes of method, All the work for all 10 bells

24 each 123456, 234567, 345678, 456789, 567890 at the back

In a related field, the late John Leary put together a series of 30 spliced royal methods in a cyclic 9-part construction. Whilst this doesn’t have the same bespoke qualities of the Pipe compositions (for example lacking a pivot-lead structure in the plain course), it contains many interesting methods and neat leads.

The composition is simply four bobs at Before to bring up the cyclic part-end 1902345678. The methods are well-structured, with some very nice new methods created for the peal (see for example Bramall Lane, b& 3-56.4-56-6-4-5.4.56.4.5-56-1, 2).

The composition was first rung (in shortened form) in 2007, and forms the basis for longer lengths of royal to be attempted shortly – sadly John isn’t around to complete his good work. The effort to expand the composition has involved some additions from David Hull and some very recent distributed further progress. Watch this space…

234567890
573920486 Beginning
648203957 Kenilworth Road
089674523 Loftus Road
860492735 Bristol
907856342 Stinking Bishop
795038264 Nideggen
426385079 Otterbourne
352749608 Bramall Lane
- 908674523 Savernake
897056342 Kegworth
069482735 Fereneze
640293857 Gresty Road
234567089 Burnden Park
352748690 Allington
573829406 St Neots
- 906482735 Burnley
698074523 Jugsholme
867950342 Kananga
785639204 Lufkin
420395678 Thimbleby
352748069 Essex
234507986 Clifton
- 904263857 Quixwood
573826049 Craven Cottage
785634290 Kings Norton
867459302 Southampton University
496082735 Goldfinger
352708964 City Ground
230597486 Stratford upon Avon
- 902345678 Elgin

===4) Further improvements in two-part tenors-together compositions – 1654327880 partends===

* Yorkshire Surprise – Mark Davies - 2002
* Yorkshire Surprise – David Pipe – 2009
* Bristol Surprise – John Warboys – c2006

Whilst many previous examples of two-part compositions involved the partend 1243657890, the decade saw the emergence of some interesting examples with a partend 1654327890.

This framework is elegant, with the clear attraction that wherever a run involving bells 2,3,4,5,6 appears in the first half of the composition, a corresponding reverse run will delight in the second half.

[This effect isn’t guaranteed in 2-parts with a 124365 partend – see for example the 2nd part of Chris Poole’s 5080 #2 (MIVMHHMW)

Mark Davies created some 2-parts of Yorkshire on this new plan in 2002, though waited 7 years before publishing (after a very tidy new DJP composition on this theme was published);

5040 Yorkshire Surprise Royal (DJP)
M W H 23456
- 2 24536
2 3 43526
- X 65432
2-part
X=16

5040 Yorkshire Surprise Royal, arr MBD (SMC32)
No.1 (local scope)
23456 M W B H
24536 - 2
53624 - x
46325 - -
24365 -
53462 - -
65432 -
2 part, x = 16

5040 Yorkshire Surprise Royal, arr MBD (SMC32)
No.2 (local scope)
M W H 23456
- - 64352
2 2 53462
s s 24365
s 23465
s - 65432
2 part

John Warboys, Don Morrison and other have also explored this effect. A simple example by John is his Bristol Royal:

5040 Bristol S. Royal
23456 V O I
35426 -
32546 2 -
46325 - 2
43652 x
65432 - -
2-part. x = 167890.
All courses contain little-bell music.

===5) Bespoke single-method compositions of Bristol Royal – David Hull – various===

Also:
* Bristol / Triton / Yorkshire – Chris Poole
* Eg Jennie’s Endeavour – Mark Davies

There are different schools of thought about Bristol Royal peal compositions. Neat tenors-together peals, especially two-parts, are well-suited to 8ths place calls. (John Warboys’ example above being just one example).

Indeed, Mark Davies goes so far to stated on his website that,

''“From a musical perspective, Bristol Royal is better with 8th's place bobs; with an average of only just over one call per course possible with 4th's place bobs, the linking possibilities are very slim, making it very hard to stay in good courses and avoid the bad. 4th's place calls are also bad news for those who like their course-end rollups”''

I feel this is too much of a generalisation. As mentioned in the introduction, Bristol Royal ringing and compositions have undergone a renaissance in the past decade. Much of this has been down to bespoke compositions, many by David Hull.

David’s use of the four-lead block 1,2,4 to achieve the magnificent six transition has already been mentioned. Similar motifs, such as the six-lead block S2.S4.S6 to act as a cyclic shunt (whilst going from forward to reverse runs) are also very well employed in his compositions.

An example well-rounded composition illustrative of the progress is:

5002 Bristol Surprise Royal (no.10)
234567890 Leads
243 SH
56342 SM.W
7654382 7ths.Out
902345678 1.3 3
987654320 7.13 21
357924680 1.2.4 4
627384950 1.2.4 4
987654230 S1.2.4 4
432567890 3.9.11 11
423 SH
(53624) M.W
24365 M.SW.SH
(42536) W.M.SW

First rung at Northallerton, 21 July 2007

It should be mentioned that various other composers have played with neat transition blocks as well. For example, Chris Poole has various nice compositions here – in Bristol he uses 7 & 8 lead courses called (3, 4½) and (2½, 4) for a cyclic shift (alternating the stroke of runs also), whilst analogous 8 & 9 lead blocks in Triton called (1, 3) also lead to notable compositions:

5160 Triton Delight Royal
234567890
----------------------------
354769820 1 3 (8)
456789023 1 3 (9)
576982043 1 3 (8)
678902345 1 3 (9)
798204365 1 3 (8)
890234567 1 3 (9)
920436587 1 3 (8)
023456789 1 3 (9)
243657089 1 4 (8)
243659078 5 (9)
243657890 4 5 (9)
34625 1 3 5 8 (8)
64523 1 (9)
35426 1 9 (9)
23456 8 (9)

As a related example, Chris has also exploited the simple effect of calling pairs of bobs on a series of bells to achieve a nice simple Yorkshire composition from 2001:

5162 Yorkshire Surprise Royal (No. 2)
234567890
--------------------------
902345678 2,10,11,19 (23)
789023456 2,10,11,19 (23)
543209876 2,10 (16)
765432098 2,10,11,19 (23)
987654320 2,10,11,19 (23)
524367890 2,10,12 (16)
(324) s5
Call paired bobs on 10-6, 6-10 followed by W sW.

Finally in this section I feel it’s appropriate to highlight an example of a bespoke composition in a great new method. I’ve selected this composition of the previously-mentioned Jennie's Endeavour Surprise Royal – both the method and composition are by Mark Davies.

The method is f-group royal with a feature that appeared a number of times in new methods over the decade: regular handstroke half-leads (so backrounds appears in the plain course at handstroke).

The consequence of this is that calls at the half-lead have the opposite effect to leadend calls. In MBD’s words,

''“This means rapid and unexpected jumps from one position to another can be carried out, and without having to trawl through undesirable leads. Part of the goal of this peal was to provide something really exciting and unpredictable, so the band never knows what is going to come up next”''

The composition makes good use of this property, utilising four types of calls to pack in a varied heap of music. The method is coursing-dominated, and to exploit this the composition also contains sections of what MBD slightly ambitiously calls “tittums” (here four consecutive bells coursing). Again, to quote the loquacious MBD,

''“Coursing orders are often revisited unexpectedly, and the same backbell positions are brought up in different ways. Both the front bells and the back bells are turned around on average more than once a course, but despite the dynamic movement the little bells remain throughout the peal in coursing orders which provide runs of varying kinds”''

5000 Jennie's Endeavour Surprise Royal
234567890
---------
65432 1 8 9 (MWH)
62345 3½ 4½ 5½ 8
43526 1 8 (MW)
435267089 4
243657890 3½ X 7½
325460987 s3½ s4 s5 s5½ 8 9
674523890 3½ s4 4½ s5 5½ 7
634527089 4 s7
234569078 s1 5
354269870 3 3½ 4½ s7½ 9
645237890 ½ s4 4½ 5½ 8½
645239078 4 5
632547890 ½ 3½ 4½ 5½ 8 8½
23456 1 (M)
---------

4th's place calls at lead end, with:
½ = half-lead bob, pn 70
s½ = half-lead single, pn 7890
X = big bob before (pn 16, lead 4)

Contains:
Entire plain course
7 567890
5 657890
9 098765 off the front
193 LB4
113 LB5
46 xxxxxx0987/7890xxxxxx
7 xxxxx09876/67890xxxxx
38 leads in the Tittums
...and various other goodies.

===6) Mega-tittums on 10 – David Pipe and Philip Earis – 2006 onwards===
Following on from the previous composition, a much more complete tittums effect can be achieved if every consecutive bell is coursing. And whilst there had already been a trend in recent years of compositions using more tittums-style coursing orders, such as (7)65432, the “mega tittums” effect of all consecutive bells coursing was really exploited for the first time in the decade.

To easily get the bells in the mega-tittums order from the plain course, a sequence of bobs of different sizes can be used in the same carefully selected calling position (for example in royal, 8ths, 6ths and 4ths place bobs when the tenor runs out).

In a more conventional tenors-together framework, a lone 4ths place call will go into mega-tittums from coursing order 65432. The tenors-together composition below, predominantly with 8ths place bobs, illustrates things nicely.

5000 Bristol S Royal (DJP)
----------------------
V O I H 23456
- 34256
- - 45362
-* 453627089
3 - - 563427890
- - 34562
- - 46325
- - 64523
2 3 - 42356
- 23456
---------------------
* 4ths place call

The more bells there are, and the more coursing-dominated the chosen method is, the more incredible the mega-tittums effect. We’ll have to wait for 12 bells and higher stages before manifestations of the full glory of mega-tittums though…

===7) Spliced Surprise (9-14m), tenors together, atw – Richard Pearce – Summer 2001===
The decade has also seen clever arrangements of more “old school” one-part spliced royal, keeping the tenors together whilst preserving the all-the-work property.

Building on work of Roddy Horton and Graham John, Richard Pearce has created a series of tenors-together spliced in 9-14 methods on this plan.

As explained in the comprehensive ringing-theory message of December 2006 (http://www.bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2006-December/001666.html), the composition is based on sets of courses with the bells in 2nds, 5ths and 6ths rotated. This allows some familiar methods to be included, along with a change of method every lead and a fairly even method distribution.

5160 (14 methods)
23456 M W H
53462 s s R/LEGL/YSRYSRY
63452 s SR/EGLE
53426 s s G/Y/L
42365 s s - EGLE/S/G/
52364 s AKIAKIAK/DC
62354 s ND/IAKIAKIA
(52364) s K/
34265 s - CNDCN/I/
23465 - BPBPBP/
63425 s LEGLEGLE/R
42356 s s - YSRYSRY/GLEG/SRYSRYS/
(52346) s DC/
62345 s AKIAKIA/ND
52346 s CNDCNDC/K
34256 s - I/NDCNDCN/
64253 s R/B
(54236) s s PBPBP/C/
23456 s - BPBPBP/L/
400 each Cambridge, London No 3, Rutland; 360 each Anglia, Bristol, Eardleigh, Irvine, Kegworth (G), Kinross, Lincolnshire (N), Nideggen (D), Pudsey, Superlative No 2, Yorkshire; 128 com, atw.

==See Also==
*[[Compositions of the Decade 1 - Introduction]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 2 - Doubles]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 3 - Minor]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 4 - Triples]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 5 - Major]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 6 - Caters]]
[[Category: Composition Reviews]]

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 7 - Royal

2009-12-16T16:25:00Z

Pje24:

__NOTOC__
===A Review by Philip Earis - continued===
Royal ringing has greatly improved over the decade, becoming much sharper and more focused. Progress has occurred across the board, with a shift to better established methods, the appearance of some cracking and daring new methods, and a trend towards smarter and neater “runny” compositions, without fear of conventional dogmas.

These trends have been further extrapolated with the widespread development of both cyclic compositions, along with some great new cyclic methods also. Furthermore, as we shall see other very new types of compositions have also established a foothold.

===Established Methods===
Turning first to single-method peals in established methods, the decade has enjoyed a marked transition towards better methods with more musical potential.

Ten-bell peal numbers overall seem to show a sustained rise compared with the 1990s. Peals of Yorkshire royal are up 25%.

However, the biggest trend by far has been the stratospheric rise in Bristol. There have been 718 peals of Bristol Royal published so far since the beginning of the year 2000, a massive 120% rise on the 326 from the 1990s. Peal bands around the country, perhaps especially in the North West, have been attracted to the beautiful elegance and music potential of the method, and their thirst for the nectar of musical compositions has been a force for progress.

Happily, there has also been a reduction in some of the nastier elements of 10-bell ringing. Peals of Rutland are down 37%, Pudsey down 43%, and spliced in 8 methods (which on ten almost invariably means one thing) down 24%.

===New methods – “regular”===
It has been a great decade for new royal methods. Triton Delight - quite simply London Royal with music off the front - was first pealed in May 1999, and there have subsequently been over 60 repeat performances. Whilst this is an indicator of progress, it is sadly a sign of some conductors’ intransigence that there have still been an order of magnitude more peals of London. This gap will surely be further eroded in the years ahead.

The two other great royal methods of the 1990s – Normanby Surprise, and Brave New World – set the scene for the developments of the 2000s. Neither stuck to tired and pointless limiting conventions – Normanby is a super double mx method with 3 consecutive blows, whilst Brave New World eschewed both conventional symmetry and plain bob leadheads to launch a cyclic odyssey.

The new methods of the present decade have continued and developed these trends, to impressive effect. Mark Davies has led the charge with “regular” (ie plain bob leadhead), coursing-dominated methods, including:

Black Pearl: &-5-4.5-2.3.2-9.8.9-6.7-6-1,1
Snow Tiger: &3-5.4-5-3.2-9.8-6-7.6-8.9,2
Raspberry Crumble: &3-5.4-5-3-2-8-56.4.3.2-8.9,2
Jennie’s Endeavour: &3-5.4-5-3-3478-58-6-7.6-8.9,2

Whilst there is little point in breaking conventions just for the sake of it, there is even less point in conventions existing just for the sake of it. It is good to see innovative examples of methods with 9ths in the notation above the treble, for just about the first time. These allow, inter alia, elegant double methods like Snow Tiger.

Incidentally, whilst I think I first published the figures for double method Snow Tiger (Royal), Mark claims an independent earlier discovery, and links it with his eponymous delight maximus method. The method is certainly good enough to fight over.

===New methods – cyclic glory===

In parallel to the above, the early years of the decade saw the arrival of a string of cyclic methods – ie methods with leadheads that are rotations of rounds. Cyclic methods cannot have conventional palindromic symmetry (at least not if started at the symmetry point). However, other symmetries can be used. The super new major method Anglia Cyclic (+-1-2367-1-7-5-36-4-2) employed rotational symmetry, but here on ten bells two new method stand out:

Double Resurrection (+-678-67-1-7-9-345-45-1-4-2)
Spinning Jennie (&56.3-4.5.2-1-34-5.36.4-1.56.8.56.1,1)

The very simple right-place plain method Double Resurrection uses glide symmetry to great effect, whilst MBD’s Spinning Jennie cleverly is conventionally double (building on a Philip Saddleton idea), nominally with irregular leadheads, but is started at the treble snap to magically produce a clever cyclic method.

These both offer an incredibly concentrated musical experience and are really pleasurable to ring. If there’s one thing you take home from this whole series of articles, it should be to try ringing some cyclic royal.

===Composition trends===
The vast majority of royal peals rung continue to be in regular (ie plain bob leadhead) methods. And the compositions for these – both in what has been produced and in what is frequently rung - have both leapt forward over the decade.

Continuing a previous trend, little-bell runs have been very much at the fore – the progress is such that any new royal composition citing a “CRU” count would be laughed out of court. Compositional footnotes like “All courses contain little-bell music” have not only appeared, but become much more common - yardsticks, even.

Indeed, the trend towards runs has been extrapolated to cyclic compositions also - both pure cyclic 9- and 10-parts, and compositions including cyclic transitions, have featured prominently.

Cyclic compositions are especially attractive – and have become almost the default – in spliced, offering an easy yet potentially really musical way to achieve all-the-work for all the method. Indeed, the decade has seen the emergence of the first adventurous “bespoke” peals of spliced royal, with the methods customised to maximise the composition’s music, as we shall see.

Bespoke compositions have also taken off in single method peals, especially Bristol Royal. David Hull has led the way here – the method’s flexibility allows different tastes to be catered for. The trend has continued to other, less compliant methods – Graham Bradshaw has done some good work trying to squeeze music from Cambridge, for example (I haven’t selected these below, but see www.ringing.org for examples).

Clever tricks have also improved straight 14-course tenors-together compositions in single methods. Two-parts with just calls at M, W and H are very common, and many people might have thought all possibilities had been exhausted by the end of the 1990s. However, such 2-part compositions have expanded beyond just straight 1243657890 partend changes, with some interesting developments with 1654327890 partends.

Just like with major, a mixture of pencil-and-paper logic and the raw power of the SMC32 software have meant that many better royal compositions have been produced.

As an aside, I have no qualms about using the word “better” – with orchestral music, it’s very subjective and not meaningful to compare Mahler and Handel with a view to ranking them. However, change ringing’s constraints and formalisms mean that any effect (and hence any set of compositions) can be quantised in a systematic way. The only input is choosing a suitable metric to compare. Over the decade different composers’ metrics have started to converge, I feel, and whilst complete convergence is unrealistic (and arguably undesirable), there is still some way to go to avoid people talking across each other.

Moreover, royal compositions have seen much acceptance and uptake of less conventional calls, when used to good effect. Calls at 7ths, and indeed different bobs such as 16, 18, 123456 have all appeared, and also led to improvements in simple 2-part compositions.

Using multiple types of calls can be an elegant way to get all consecutive bells coursing, and other new types of compositions based on this “mega tittums” plan have made their first appearance. 10 bells are just about enough for the effect to be pronounced and effective.

===Summary===
Like standing on high ground and admiring the vista behind after a long walk, it’s an exhilarating time to survey the progress in 10-bell ringing. The march towards even higher ground needs to continue. Let’s just hope that the broader body of ringers catch up with the advances, and these are better reflected in what is actually frequently rung.

==1) Further improvements in two-part tenors-together compositions==

* Triton Delight – David Hull et al – 2003
* Yorkshire Surprise – Mark Davies - 2004

I’ve selected David’s Triton as the lead typical example of how simple tenors-together compositions have got better in recent decades. The grounds for inclusion could be questioned here – the composition is an improved tweak from Don Morrison based on the 1990s Hull little-bell classic “the fluke”, whilst the method has similarities to London (the overwork and leadhead group), but with substantially more music under the treble. Overall, though, I feel this shows what can be simply achieved which in the past simply was not achieved:

5040 Triton Delight
23456 M W H
42356 -
65324 - - -
43526 - -
25634 - -
34562 - s s
56342 - -
24365 - - -
Repeat

Touch contains:
Odd Even Total
xxxx567890 = 0 + 14 = 14
xxxx657890 = 0 + 14 = 14
xxxxxx2345 = 12 + 12 = 24
xxxxxx5432 = 12 + 12 = 24
xxxxxx3456 = 24 + 24 = 48
xxxxxx6543 = 24 + 24 = 48
0987xxxxxx = 70 + 0 = 70
7890xxxxxx = 42 + 0 = 42
2345xxxxxx = 8 + 8 = 16
5432xxxxxx = 6 + 6 = 12
3456xxxxxx = 14 + 14 = 28
6543xxxxxx = 14 + 14 = 28

MBD also claims a re-arrangement, changing two pairs of bobs for singles, but without extra musical gain. He’s on less shaky ground when he turns to Yorkshire. The composition below contains a great spread of little-bell music, both in variety of runs and in its distribution in the composition. The finish is especially nice, going from 24653 to 53246 in the last course of the peal.

In Mark’s words, “This is my absolute favourite conventional two-part… 3.5 courses of the last part are in LB5 coursing orders. I think it's absolutely fascinating that such a result is possible from a two-part structure: a very simple structure, too, that really just boils down to 2W 2H repeated, padded. To ring, it's possibly even better than the best one-part -very-nearly-almost as much music, plus all the fun of watching the second part unfold knowing what the first has foretold. Magic”. Indeed.

5040 Yorkshire (No.1)
23456 M W H
---------------
24356 s
53462 s 2 2
46325 s s -
53624 - -
24365 - s s
---------------
2 part

Contains:
13 567890
13 657890
53 LB5
104 3456/6543
60 2345/5432
10 4567/7654

==2) Cyclic method compositions==

* Double Resurrection Cyclic Bob – Andrew Tibbetts – 2003
* Spinning Jennie Delight – David Pipe - 2003

As described above, Double Resurrection is a fantastic yet simple right-place plain cyclic method. It has an efficient structure and glide symmetry, leading to reverse runs round every half-lead, and forward runs round every leadhead.

The composition below is the first to combine the excellent “magnificent 6” rounds -> queens transition on 10 bells with the benefit of a cyclic method to fully exploit the effect. And the effect is truly mesmerising. I find it hard to fully describe its joys to those who haven’t experienced it.

1234567890 (rounds)
----------
1357924680 (queens)
1594837260 (reverse tittums)
1987654320 (reverse rounds)
1864297530 (reverse queens)
1627384950 (tittums)
1234567890 (rounds)

The plain nature of the method means that varied music appears very frequently, in a continuous “music box” demonstration. This, coupled with the rapid forward / reverse nature of the music, further magnify the effect. Both the tittums and queens block cycles (and their reverses) sound much more appealing than you might naively expect.

(Of course, when the composition is in the “reverse rounds” section, the forward runs appear around the half-lead)

The remainder of the composition consists of singled-in courses to provide a joyful variation on the theme. It’s awesome.

5040 Double Resurrection (#6)
5 6 7 8 9 234567890
ss ss s ss 324
s s 243
(a) 357924680
ss s 375
(a) 594837260
s 549
(a) 987654320
6 ss s 978
(a) 864297530
ss s 846
(a) 627384950
s 672
(b) 432567890
s 423
s s 234567890

(a)=2,s3,s5,7,8,9,s12 (12 leads)

Of course, the “magnificent six” transition can also be captured in a composition using methods with plain bob leadheads. The four-lead block 1,2,4 has been used in a number of David Hull Bristol Royal compositions to achieve this effect (more on this later), and can be extrapolated to a whole peal composition. Rob Lee put together the following:

5220 Double Coslany/10440 Bristol:

234567890
---------------------
1, 2, 4 864297530
1, 2, 4 594837260
4 602374859
2, 3, 4 972640853
2, 3, 4 342907856
s1, s8, 9 345678902
---------------------
9 part. Contains the 54 cycles of rounds, queens & tittums and reverses thereof.

This exploits the regular nature of the method, using half the plain course to join up the reverse tittums/tittums and reverse rounds/rounds positions. As Rob explains,

''“…Doing this means that some of the part ends occur at handstroke instead of backstroke, and so the 1,2,4 block is used in reverse when this is the case. Unfortunately, the cyclic part end obtained is 567890234 which means rounds occurs after 3 parts. A bit of fiddling around solves this, but at the expense of a bit of symmetry/music”''

Going back to cyclic methods, a further example of what can be achieved is with the treble-dodging method Spinning Jennie. The method is conventionally double with the following notation:

&56.3-4.5.2-1-34-5.36.4-1.56.8.56.1, 1 = 1485309627

However, ringing this starting away from the symmetry point brings up the cyclic method:

+x4.5.2x1x34x5.36.4x1.56.8.56.1.56.8.56.1x4.36.5x34x1x2.5.4x3.56.1.56.3 = 1345678902

The music isn’t as concentrated or dare I say pronounced as Resurrection, but still allows some very interesting effects. David Pipe put together the following composition, designed to bring out the runs given by the method.

5000 Spinning Jennie Delight Royal
1234567890
-------------------------------------
1543267890 s4.s4½
1452367890 3.4
1325476980 s4.s4½.s7.s9
1325476809 9
1234568709 3.4.7
1345627890 s1.3.5.s8
1436578902 3.4.7.9
1243658709 7.8 (8 leads)
1243658079 s9
1243650987 s½.8.9
1234569078 4.5.8.9
1234560987 8.9
1325460897 3.4.s9
1234567890 s½.3.4
-------------------------------------
Backstroke-snap start and finish.

Bob = 38, Single = 389 both made at the backstroke-snap.
Half-lead single = 89

There remains an opportunity for a magnificent 6 style composition here, I feel.

==3) Bespoke cyclic royal compositions – David Pipe – April 2003 / October 2003==

David Pipe’s 9-part and 10-part spliced royal compositions are a sort of contraction of his classic maximus compositions on a similar plan.

The methods in the royal peals – named after James Bond villains – are all custom-designed to yield a feast of music in the leads they appear in the composition. The new methods used, such as Goldfinger, are also intrinsically very attractive.

A link method is used to move the bells between the cyclic parts. The main block of the composition has the 2nd and the tenor of that cyclic part (so in the 9-part composition, bells 5 and 6 in the first part) alternately ringing “pivot leads”, ie the leads where they are the pivot bell.

Pivot leads are almost invariably the most musical in a method, and this structure yields a great way to ring as many plain leads in the part as possible, benefitting from an elegant palindromic structure which leads to a great balance of forward and reverse runs in each part.

Unlike maximus, a cyclic royal composition of primarily treble-dodging (single-dodging) methods needs to contain more than just the plain leads from each cyclic part to take the length over 5000 changes. In the Pipe compositions, the “padding” is based on two blocks of three bobs.

“Padding” is an unfair word as these sections are also very well-chosen, though. Custom-designed methods are again used for the best effect – for example, Kananga, which yields limited music off the front in the plain course, but much more in the 243 course in which it actually appears in the composition.

All in all, two finely crafted examples. (David Hull also has a similar, later composition containing methods with “opposite” pivot bells)

5022 Spliced Royal (8m)
234567890 Oddjob Little Alliance
-453028967 Ourumov Surprise
342590786 Zorin Surprise
-345028967 Kananga Surprise
-534028967 Scaramanga Alliance
452390786 Goldfinger Surprise
305846279 Dr No Differential Surprise
249573608 Blofeld Alliance
083657492 Blofeld Alliance
927465830 Dr No Differential Surprise
860739524 Goldfinger Surprise
796284053 Scaramanga Alliance
-867902345 Kananga Surprise
-786902345 Zorin Surprise
897264053 Ourumov Surprise
-678902345
9 part

720 each Dr No Differential S., Goldfinger S., Kananaga S.,
Ouromov S., Zorin S.; 648 each Blofeld A., Scaramanga A.;
126 Oddjob Little A.; 125 changes of method, all the work

5000 Spliced Royal (8m)
8901234567 Nick Nack
-------------------------------------
-1908674523 Largo Alliance
1897056342 Zorin Surprise
-1890674523 Kananga Surprise
-1089674523 Scaramanga Alliance
1907856342 Drax Little Alliance
1860492735 Dr No Differential
1795038264 Jaws Little Alliance
1648203957 Jaws Little Alliance
1573920486 Dr No Differential
1426385079 Drax Little Alliance
1352749608 Scaramanga Alliance
-1423567890 Kananga Surprise
-1342567890 Zorin Surprise
1453729608 Largo Alliance
-1234567890
-------------------------------------
10 part

800 Dr No Differential S, Kananga S, Zorin S; 640 Largo A; 600 Jaws Little A; 560 Drax Little A, Elektra A; 240 Nick Nack Differential Little Hybrid; 139 changes of method, All the work for all 10 bells

24 each 123456, 234567, 345678, 456789, 567890 at the back

In a related field, the late John Leary put together a series of 30 spliced royal methods in a cyclic 9-part construction. Whilst this doesn’t have the same bespoke qualities of the Pipe compositions (for example lacking a pivot-lead structure in the plain course), it contains many interesting methods and neat leads.

The composition is simply four bobs at Before to bring up the cyclic part-end 1902345678. The methods are well-structured, with some very nice new methods created for the peal (see for example Bramall Lane, b& 3-56.4-56-6-4-5.4.56.4.5-56-1, 2).

The composition was first rung (in shortened form) in 2007, and forms the basis for longer lengths of royal to be attempted shortly – sadly John isn’t around to complete his good work. The effort to expand the composition has involved some additions from David Hull and some very recent distributed further progress. Watch this space…

234567890
573920486 Beginning
648203957 Kenilworth Road
089674523 Loftus Road
860492735 Bristol
907856342 Stinking Bishop
795038264 Nideggen
426385079 Otterbourne
352749608 Bramall Lane
- 908674523 Savernake
897056342 Kegworth
069482735 Fereneze
640293857 Gresty Road
234567089 Burnden Park
352748690 Allington
573829406 St Neots
- 906482735 Burnley
698074523 Jugsholme
867950342 Kananga
785639204 Lufkin
420395678 Thimbleby
352748069 Essex
234507986 Clifton
- 904263857 Quixwood
573826049 Craven Cottage
785634290 Kings Norton
867459302 Southampton University
496082735 Goldfinger
352708964 City Ground
230597486 Stratford upon Avon
- 902345678 Elgin

===4) Further improvements in two-part tenors-together compositions – 1654327880 partends===

* Yorkshire Surprise – Mark Davies - 2002
* Yorkshire Surprise – David Pipe – 2009
* Bristol Surprise – John Warboys – c2006

Whilst many previous examples of two-part compositions involved the partend 1243657890, the decade saw the emergence of some interesting examples with a partend 1654327890.

This framework is elegant, with the clear attraction that wherever a run involving bells 2,3,4,5,6 appears in the first half of the composition, a corresponding reverse run will delight in the second half.

[This effect isn’t guaranteed in 2-parts with a 124365 partend – see for example the 2nd part of Chris Poole’s 5080 #2 (MIVMHHMW)

Mark Davies created some 2-parts of Yorkshire on this new plan in 2002, though waited 7 years before publishing (after a very tidy new DJP composition on this theme was published);

5040 Yorkshire Surprise Royal (DJP)
M W H 23456
- 2 24536
2 3 43526
- X 65432
2-part
X=16

5040 Yorkshire Surprise Royal, arr MBD (SMC32)
No.1 (local scope)
23456 M W B H
24536 - 2
53624 - x
46325 - -
24365 -
53462 - -
65432 -
2 part, x = 16

5040 Yorkshire Surprise Royal, arr MBD (SMC32)
No.2 (local scope)
M W H 23456
- - 64352
2 2 53462
s s 24365
s 23465
s - 65432
2 part

John Warboys, Don Morrison and other have also explored this effect. A simple example by John is his Bristol Royal:

5040 Bristol S. Royal
23456 V O I
35426 -
32546 2 -
46325 - 2
43652 x
65432 - -
2-part. x = 167890.
All courses contain little-bell music.

===5) Bespoke single-method compositions of Bristol Royal – David Hull – various===

Also

· Bristol / Triton / Yorkshire – Chris Poole

· Eg Jennie’s Endeavour – Mark Davies

There are different schools of thought about Bristol Royal peal compositions. Neat tenors-together peals, especially two-parts, are well-suited to 8ths place calls. (John Warboys’ example above being just one example).

Indeed, Mark Davies goes so far to stated on his website that,

“From a musical perspective, Bristol Royal is better with 8th's place bobs; with an average of only just over one call per course possible with 4th's place bobs, the linking possibilities are very slim, making it very hard to stay in good courses and avoid the bad. 4th's place calls are also bad news for those who like their course-end rollups”

I feel this is too much of a generalisation. As mentioned in the introduction, Bristol Royal ringing and compositions have undergone a renaissance in the past decade. Much of this has been down to bespoke compositions, many by David Hull.

David’s use of the four-lead block 1,2,4 to achieve the magnificent six transition has already been mentioned. Similar motifs, such as the six-lead block S2.S4.S6 to act as a cyclic shunt (whilst going from forward to reverse runs) are also very well employed in his compositions.

An example well-rounded composition illustrative of the progress is:

5002 Bristol Surprise Royal (no.10)

234567890 Leads

243 SH

56342 SM.W

7654382 7ths.Out

902345678 1.3 3

987654320 7.13 21

357924680 1.2.4 4

627384950 1.2.4 4

987654230 S1.2.4 4

432567890 3.9.11 11

423 SH

(53624) M.W

24365 M.SW.SH

(42536) W.M.SW

First rung at Northallerton, 21 July 2007

It should be mentioned that various other composers have played with neat transition blocks as well. For example, Chris Poole has various nice compositions here – in Bristol he uses 7 & 8 lead courses called (3, 4½) and (2½, 4) for a cyclic shift (alternating the stroke of runs also), whilst analogous 8 & 9 lead blocks in Triton called (1, 3) also lead to notable compositions:

5160 Triton Delight Royal

234567890

----------------------------

354769820 1 3 (8)

456789023 1 3 (9)

576982043 1 3 (8)

678902345 1 3 (9)

798204365 1 3 (8)

890234567 1 3 (9)

920436587 1 3 (8)

023456789 1 3 (9)

243657089 1 4 (8)

243659078 5 (9)

243657890 4 5 (9)

34625 1 3 5 8 (8)

64523 1 (9)

35426 1 9 (9)

23456 8 (9)

As a related example, Chris has also exploited the simple effect of calling pairs of bobs on a series of bells to achieve a nice simple Yorkshire composition from 2001:

5162 Yorkshire Surprise Royal (No. 2)

234567890

--------------------------

902345678 2,10,11,19 (23)

789023456 2,10,11,19 (23)

543209876 2,10 (16)

765432098 2,10,11,19 (23)

987654320 2,10,11,19 (23)

524367890 2,10,12 (16)

(324) s5

Call paired bobs on 10-6, 6-10 followed by W sW.

Finally in this section I feel it’s appropriate to highlight an example of a bespoke composition in a great new method. I’ve selected this composition of the previously-mentioned Jennie's Endeavour Surprise Royal – both the method and composition are by Mark Davies.

The method is f-group royal with a feature that appeared a number of times in new methods over the decade: regular handstroke half-leads (so backrounds appears in the plain course at handstroke).

The consequence of this is that calls at the half-lead have the opposite effect to leadend calls. In MBD’s words,

“This means rapid and unexpected jumps from one position to another can be carried out, and without having to trawl through undesirable leads. Part of the goal of this peal was to provide something really exciting and unpredictable, so the band never knows what is going to come up next”

The composition makes good use of this property, utilising four types of calls to pack in a varied heap of music. The method is coursing-dominated, and to exploit this the composition also contains sections of what MBD slightly ambitiously calls “tittums” (here four consecutive bells coursing). Again, to quote the loquacious MBD,

“Coursing orders are often revisited unexpectedly, and the same backbell positions are brought up in different ways. Both the front bells and the back bells are turned around on average more than once a course, but despite the dynamic movement the little bells remain throughout the peal in coursing orders which provide runs of varying kinds”

5000 Jennie's Endeavour Surprise Royal

234567890

---------

65432 1 8 9 (MWH)

62345 3½ 4½ 5½ 8

43526 1 8 (MW)

435267089 4

243657890 3½ X 7½

325460987 s3½ s4 s5 s5½ 8 9

674523890 3½ s4 4½ s5 5½ 7

634527089 4 s7

234569078 s1 5

354269870 3 3½ 4½ s7½ 9

645237890 ½ s4 4½ 5½ 8½

645239078 4 5

632547890 ½ 3½ 4½ 5½ 8 8½

23456 1 (M)

---------

4th's place calls at lead end, with:

½ = half-lead bob, pn 70

s½ = half-lead single, pn 7890

X = big bob before (pn 16, lead 4)

Contains:

Entire plain course

7 567890

5 657890

9 098765 off the front

193 LB4

113 LB5

46 xxxxxx0987/7890xxxxxx

7 xxxxx09876/67890xxxxx

38 leads in the Tittums

...and various other goodies.

6) Mega-tittums on 10 – David Pipe and Philip Earis – 2006 onwards

Following on from the previous composition, a much more complete tittums effect can be achieved if every consecutive bell is coursing. And whilst there had already been a trend in recent years of compositions using more tittums-style coursing orders, such as (7)65432, the “mega tittums” effect of all consecutive bells coursing was really exploited for the first time in the decade.

To easily get the bells in the mega-tittums order from the plain course, a sequence of bobs of different sizes can be used in the same carefully selected calling position (for example in royal, 8ths, 6ths and 4ths place bobs when the tenor runs out).

In a more conventional tenors-together framework, a lone 4ths place call will go into mega-tittums from coursing order 65432. The tenors-together composition below, predominantly with 8ths place bobs, illustrates things nicely.

5000 Bristol S Royal (DJP)

----------------------

V O I H 23456

- 34256

- - 45362

-* 453627089

3 - - 563427890

- - 34562

- - 46325

- - 64523

2 3 - 42356

- 23456

---------------------

* 4ths place call

The more bells there are, and the more coursing-dominated the chosen method is, the more incredible the mega-tittums effect. We’ll have to wait for 12 bells and higher stages before manifestations of the full glory of mega-tittums though…

7) Spliced Surprise (9-14m), tenors together, atw – Richard Pearce – Summer 2001

The decade has also seen clever arrangements of more “old school” one-part spliced royal, keeping the tenors together whilst preserving the all-the-work property.

Building on work of Roddy Horton and Graham John, Richard Pearce has created a series of tenors-together spliced in 9-14 methods on this plan.

As explained in the comprehensive ringing-theory message of December 2006 (http://www.bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2006-December/001666.html), the composition is based on sets of courses with the bells in 2nds, 5ths and 6ths rotated. This allows some familiar methods to be included, along with a change of method every lead and a fairly even method distribution.

5160 (14 methods)
23456 M W H
53462 s s R/LEGL/YSRYSRY
63452 s SR/EGLE
53426 s s G/Y/L
42365 s s - EGLE/S/G/
52364 s AKIAKIAK/DC
62354 s ND/IAKIAKIA
(52364) s K/
34265 s - CNDCN/I/
23465 - BPBPBP/
63425 s LEGLEGLE/R
42356 s s - YSRYSRY/GLEG/SRYSRYS/
(52346) s DC/
62345 s AKIAKIA/ND
52346 s CNDCNDC/K
34256 s - I/NDCNDCN/
64253 s R/B
(54236) s s PBPBP/C/
23456 s - BPBPBP/L/
400 each Cambridge, London No 3, Rutland; 360 each Anglia, Bristol, Eardleigh, Irvine, Kegworth (G), Kinross, Lincolnshire (N), Nideggen (D), Pudsey, Superlative No 2, Yorkshire; 128 com, atw.

==See Also==
*[[Compositions of the Decade 1 - Introduction]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 2 - Doubles]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 3 - Minor]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 4 - Triples]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 5 - Major]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 6 - Caters]]
[[Category: Composition Reviews]]

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 7 - Royal

2009-12-16T16:20:20Z

Pje24:

__NOTOC__
===A Review by Philip Earis - continued===
Royal ringing has greatly improved over the decade, becoming much sharper and more focused. Progress has occurred across the board, with a shift to better established methods, the appearance of some cracking and daring new methods, and a trend towards smarter and neater “runny” compositions, without fear of conventional dogmas.

These trends have been further extrapolated with the widespread development of both cyclic compositions, along with some great new cyclic methods also. Furthermore, as we shall see other very new types of compositions have also established a foothold.

===Established Methods===
Turning first to single-method peals in established methods, the decade has enjoyed a marked transition towards better methods with more musical potential.

Ten-bell peal numbers overall seem to show a sustained rise compared with the 1990s. Peals of Yorkshire royal are up 25%.

However, the biggest trend by far has been the stratospheric rise in Bristol. There have been 718 peals of Bristol Royal published so far since the beginning of the year 2000, a massive 120% rise on the 326 from the 1990s. Peal bands around the country, perhaps especially in the North West, have been attracted to the beautiful elegance and music potential of the method, and their thirst for the nectar of musical compositions has been a force for progress.

Happily, there has also been a reduction in some of the nastier elements of 10-bell ringing. Peals of Rutland are down 37%, Pudsey down 43%, and spliced in 8 methods (which on ten almost invariably means one thing) down 24%.

===New methods – “regular”===
It has been a great decade for new royal methods. Triton Delight - quite simply London Royal with music off the front - was first pealed in May 1999, and there have subsequently been over 60 repeat performances. Whilst this is an indicator of progress, it is sadly a sign of some conductors’ intransigence that there have still been an order of magnitude more peals of London. This gap will surely be further eroded in the years ahead.

The two other great royal methods of the 1990s – Normanby Surprise, and Brave New World – set the scene for the developments of the 2000s. Neither stuck to tired and pointless limiting conventions – Normanby is a super double mx method with 3 consecutive blows, whilst Brave New World eschewed both conventional symmetry and plain bob leadheads to launch a cyclic odyssey.

The new methods of the present decade have continued and developed these trends, to impressive effect. Mark Davies has led the charge with “regular” (ie plain bob leadhead), coursing-dominated methods, including:

Black Pearl: &-5-4.5-2.3.2-9.8.9-6.7-6-1,1
Snow Tiger: &3-5.4-5-3.2-9.8-6-7.6-8.9,2
Raspberry Crumble: &3-5.4-5-3-2-8-56.4.3.2-8.9,2
Jennie’s Endeavour: &3-5.4-5-3-3478-58-6-7.6-8.9,2

Whilst there is little point in breaking conventions just for the sake of it, there is even less point in conventions existing just for the sake of it. It is good to see innovative examples of methods with 9ths in the notation above the treble, for just about the first time. These allow, inter alia, elegant double methods like Snow Tiger.

Incidentally, whilst I think I first published the figures for double method Snow Tiger (Royal), Mark claims an independent earlier discovery, and links it with his eponymous delight maximus method. The method is certainly good enough to fight over.

===New methods – cyclic glory===

In parallel to the above, the early years of the decade saw the arrival of a string of cyclic methods – ie methods with leadheads that are rotations of rounds. Cyclic methods cannot have conventional palindromic symmetry (at least not if started at the symmetry point). However, other symmetries can be used. The super new major method Anglia Cyclic (+-1-2367-1-7-5-36-4-2) employed rotational symmetry, but here on ten bells two new method stand out:

Double Resurrection (+-678-67-1-7-9-345-45-1-4-2)
Spinning Jennie (&56.3-4.5.2-1-34-5.36.4-1.56.8.56.1,1)

The very simple right-place plain method Double Resurrection uses glide symmetry to great effect, whilst MBD’s Spinning Jennie cleverly is conventionally double (building on a Philip Saddleton idea), nominally with irregular leadheads, but is started at the treble snap to magically produce a clever cyclic method.

These both offer an incredibly concentrated musical experience and are really pleasurable to ring. If there’s one thing you take home from this whole series of articles, it should be to try ringing some cyclic royal.

===Composition trends===
The vast majority of royal peals rung continue to be in regular (ie plain bob leadhead) methods. And the compositions for these – both in what has been produced and in what is frequently rung - have both leapt forward over the decade.

Continuing a previous trend, little-bell runs have been very much at the fore – the progress is such that any new royal composition citing a “CRU” count would be laughed out of court. Compositional footnotes like “All courses contain little-bell music” have not only appeared, but become much more common - yardsticks, even.

Indeed, the trend towards runs has been extrapolated to cyclic compositions also - both pure cyclic 9- and 10-parts, and compositions including cyclic transitions, have featured prominently.

Cyclic compositions are especially attractive – and have become almost the default – in spliced, offering an easy yet potentially really musical way to achieve all-the-work for all the method. Indeed, the decade has seen the emergence of the first adventurous “bespoke” peals of spliced royal, with the methods customised to maximise the composition’s music, as we shall see.

Bespoke compositions have also taken off in single method peals, especially Bristol Royal. David Hull has led the way here – the method’s flexibility allows different tastes to be catered for. The trend has continued to other, less compliant methods – Graham Bradshaw has done some good work trying to squeeze music from Cambridge, for example (I haven’t selected these below, but see www.ringing.org for examples).

Clever tricks have also improved straight 14-course tenors-together compositions in single methods. Two-parts with just calls at M, W and H are very common, and many people might have thought all possibilities had been exhausted by the end of the 1990s. However, such 2-part compositions have expanded beyond just straight 1243657890 partend changes, with some interesting developments with 1654327890 partends.

Just like with major, a mixture of pencil-and-paper logic and the raw power of the SMC32 software have meant that many better royal compositions have been produced.

As an aside, I have no qualms about using the word “better” – with orchestral music, it’s very subjective and not meaningful to compare Mahler and Handel with a view to ranking them. However, change ringing’s constraints and formalisms mean that any effect (and hence any set of compositions) can be quantised in a systematic way. The only input is choosing a suitable metric to compare. Over the decade different composers’ metrics have started to converge, I feel, and whilst complete convergence is unrealistic (and arguably undesirable), there is still some way to go to avoid people talking across each other.

Moreover, royal compositions have seen much acceptance and uptake of less conventional calls, when used to good effect. Calls at 7ths, and indeed different bobs such as 16, 18, 123456 have all appeared, and also led to improvements in simple 2-part compositions.

Using multiple types of calls can be an elegant way to get all consecutive bells coursing, and other new types of compositions based on this “mega tittums” plan have made their first appearance. 10 bells are just about enough for the effect to be pronounced and effective.

===Summary===
Like standing on high ground and admiring the vista behind after a long walk, it’s an exhilarating time to survey the progress in 10-bell ringing. The march towards even higher ground needs to continue. Let’s just hope that the broader body of ringers catch up with the advances, and these are better reflected in what is actually frequently rung.

==1) Further improvements in two-part tenors-together compositions==

* Triton Delight – David Hull et al – 2003
* Yorkshire Surprise – Mark Davies - 2004

I’ve selected David’s Triton as the lead typical example of how simple tenors-together compositions have got better in recent decades. The grounds for inclusion could be questioned here – the composition is an improved tweak from Don Morrison based on the 1990s Hull little-bell classic “the fluke”, whilst the method has similarities to London (the overwork and leadhead group), but with substantially more music under the treble. Overall, though, I feel this shows what can be simply achieved which in the past simply was not achieved:

5040 Triton Delight
23456 M W H
42356 -
65324 - - -
43526 - -
25634 - -
34562 - s s
56342 - -
24365 - - -
Repeat

Touch contains:
Odd Even Total
xxxx567890 = 0 + 14 = 14
xxxx657890 = 0 + 14 = 14
xxxxxx2345 = 12 + 12 = 24
xxxxxx5432 = 12 + 12 = 24
xxxxxx3456 = 24 + 24 = 48
xxxxxx6543 = 24 + 24 = 48
0987xxxxxx = 70 + 0 = 70
7890xxxxxx = 42 + 0 = 42
2345xxxxxx = 8 + 8 = 16
5432xxxxxx = 6 + 6 = 12
3456xxxxxx = 14 + 14 = 28
6543xxxxxx = 14 + 14 = 28

MBD also claims a re-arrangement, changing two pairs of bobs for singles, but without extra musical gain. He’s on less shaky ground when he turns to Yorkshire. The composition below contains a great spread of little-bell music, both in variety of runs and in its distribution in the composition. The finish is especially nice, going from 24653 to 53246 in the last course of the peal.

In Mark’s words, “This is my absolute favourite conventional two-part… 3.5 courses of the last part are in LB5 coursing orders. I think it's absolutely fascinating that such a result is possible from a two-part structure: a very simple structure, too, that really just boils down to 2W 2H repeated, padded. To ring, it's possibly even better than the best one-part -very-nearly-almost as much music, plus all the fun of watching the second part unfold knowing what the first has foretold. Magic”. Indeed.

5040 Yorkshire (No.1)
23456 M W H
---------------
24356 s
53462 s 2 2
46325 s s -
53624 - -
24365 - s s
---------------
2 part

Contains:
13 567890
13 657890
53 LB5
104 3456/6543
60 2345/5432
10 4567/7654

==2) Cyclic method compositions==

* Double Resurrection Cyclic Bob – Andrew Tibbetts – 2003
* Spinning Jennie Delight – David Pipe - 2003

As described above, Double Resurrection is a fantastic yet simple right-place plain cyclic method. It has an efficient structure and glide symmetry, leading to reverse runs round every half-lead, and forward runs round every leadhead.

The composition below is the first to combine the excellent “magnificent 6” rounds -> queens transition on 10 bells with the benefit of a cyclic method to fully exploit the effect. And the effect is truly mesmerising. I find it hard to fully describe its joys to those who haven’t experienced it.

1234567890 (rounds)
----------
1357924680 (queens)
1594837260 (reverse tittums)
1987654320 (reverse rounds)
1864297530 (reverse queens)
1627384950 (tittums)
1234567890 (rounds)

The plain nature of the method means that varied music appears very frequently, in a continuous “music box” demonstration. This, coupled with the rapid forward / reverse nature of the music, further magnify the effect. Both the tittums and queens block cycles (and their reverses) sound much more appealing than you might naively expect.

(Of course, when the composition is in the “reverse rounds” section, the forward runs appear around the half-lead)

The remainder of the composition consists of singled-in courses to provide a joyful variation on the theme. It’s awesome.

5040 Double Resurrection (#6)
5 6 7 8 9 234567890
ss ss s ss 324
s s 243
(a) 357924680
ss s 375
(a) 594837260
s 549
(a) 987654320
6 ss s 978
(a) 864297530
ss s 846
(a) 627384950
s 672
(b) 432567890
s 423
s s 234567890

(a)=2,s3,s5,7,8,9,s12 (12 leads)

Of course, the “magnificent six” transition can also be captured in a composition using methods with plain bob leadheads. The four-lead block 1,2,4 has been used in a number of David Hull Bristol Royal compositions to achieve this effect (more on this later), and can be extrapolated to a whole peal composition. Rob Lee put together the following:

5220 Double Coslany/10440 Bristol:

234567890
---------------------
1, 2, 4 864297530
1, 2, 4 594837260
4 602374859
2, 3, 4 972640853
2, 3, 4 342907856
s1, s8, 9 345678902
---------------------
9 part. Contains the 54 cycles of rounds, queens & tittums and reverses thereof.

This exploits the regular nature of the method, using half the plain course to join up the reverse tittums/tittums and reverse rounds/rounds positions. As Rob explains,

''“…Doing this means that some of the part ends occur at handstroke instead of backstroke, and so the 1,2,4 block is used in reverse when this is the case. Unfortunately, the cyclic part end obtained is 567890234 which means rounds occurs after 3 parts. A bit of fiddling around solves this, but at the expense of a bit of symmetry/music”''

Going back to cyclic methods, a further example of what can be achieved is with the treble-dodging method Spinning Jennie. The method is conventionally double with the following notation:

&56.3-4.5.2-1-34-5.36.4-1.56.8.56.1, 1 = 1485309627

However, ringing this starting away from the symmetry point brings up the cyclic method:

+x4.5.2x1x34x5.36.4x1.56.8.56.1.56.8.56.1x4.36.5x34x1x2.5.4x3.56.1.56.3 = 1345678902

The music isn’t as concentrated or dare I say pronounced as Resurrection, but still allows some very interesting effects. David Pipe put together the following composition, designed to bring out the runs given by the method.

5000 Spinning Jennie Delight Royal
1234567890
-------------------------------------
1543267890 s4.s4½
1452367890 3.4
1325476980 s4.s4½.s7.s9
1325476809 9
1234568709 3.4.7
1345627890 s1.3.5.s8
1436578902 3.4.7.9
1243658709 7.8 (8 leads)
1243658079 s9
1243650987 s½.8.9
1234569078 4.5.8.9
1234560987 8.9
1325460897 3.4.s9
1234567890 s½.3.4
-------------------------------------
Backstroke-snap start and finish.

Bob = 38, Single = 389 both made at the backstroke-snap.
Half-lead single = 89

There remains an opportunity for a magnificent 6 style composition here, I feel.

==3) Bespoke cyclic royal compositions – David Pipe – April 2003 / October 2003==

David Pipe’s 9-part and 10-part spliced royal compositions are a sort of contraction of his classic maximus compositions on a similar plan.

The methods in the royal peals – named after James Bond villains – are all custom-designed to yield a feast of music in the leads they appear in the composition. The new methods used, such as Goldfinger, are also intrinsically very attractive.

A link method is used to move the bells between the cyclic parts. The main block of the composition has the 2nd and the tenor of that cyclic part (so in the 9-part composition, bells 5 and 6 in the first part) alternately ringing “pivot leads”, ie the leads where they are the pivot bell.

Pivot leads are almost invariably the most musical in a method, and this structure yields a great way to ring as many plain leads in the part as possible, benefitting from an elegant palindromic structure which leads to a great balance of forward and reverse runs in each part.

Unlike maximus, a cyclic royal composition of primarily treble-dodging (single-dodging) methods needs to contain more than just the plain leads from each cyclic part to take the length over 5000 changes. In the Pipe compositions, the “padding” is based on two blocks of three bobs.

“Padding” is an unfair word as these sections are also very well-chosen, though. Custom-designed methods are again used for the best effect – for example, Kananga, which yields limited music off the front in the plain course, but much more in the 243 course in which it actually appears in the composition.

All in all, two finely crafted examples. (David Hull also has a similar, later composition containing methods with “opposite” pivot bells)

5022 Spliced Royal (8m)

234567890 Oddjob Little Alliance

-453028967 Ourumov Surprise

342590786 Zorin Surprise

-345028967 Kananga Surprise

-534028967 Scaramanga Alliance

452390786 Goldfinger Surprise

305846279 Dr No Differential Surprise

249573608 Blofeld Alliance

083657492 Blofeld Alliance

927465830 Dr No Differential Surprise

860739524 Goldfinger Surprise

796284053 Scaramanga Alliance

-867902345 Kananga Surprise

-786902345 Zorin Surprise

897264053 Ourumov Surprise

-678902345

9 part

720 each Dr No Differential S., Goldfinger S., Kananaga S.,

Ouromov S., Zorin S.; 648 each Blofeld A., Scaramanga A.;

126 Oddjob Little A.; 125 changes of method, all the work

5000 Spliced Royal (8m)

8901234567 Nick Nack

-------------------------------------

-1908674523 Largo Alliance

1897056342 Zorin Surprise

-1890674523 Kananga Surprise

-1089674523 Scaramanga Alliance

1907856342 Drax Little Alliance

1860492735 Dr No Differential

1795038264 Jaws Little Alliance

1648203957 Jaws Little Alliance

1573920486 Dr No Differential

1426385079 Drax Little Alliance

1352749608 Scaramanga Alliance

-1423567890 Kananga Surprise

-1342567890 Zorin Surprise

1453729608 Largo Alliance

-1234567890

-------------------------------------

10 part

800 Dr No Differential S, Kananga S, Zorin S; 640 Largo A; 600 Jaws Little A; 560 Drax Little A, Elektra A; 240 Nick Nack Differential Little Hybrid; 139 changes of method, All the work for all 10 bells

24 each 123456, 234567, 345678, 456789, 567890 at the back

In a related field, the late John Leary put together a series of 30 spliced royal methods in a cyclic 9-part construction. Whilst this doesn’t have the same bespoke qualities of the Pipe compositions (for example lacking a pivot-lead structure in the plain course), it contains many interesting methods and neat leads.

The composition is simply four bobs at Before to bring up the cyclic part-end 1902345678. The methods are well-structured, with some very nice new methods created for the peal (see for example Bramall Lane, b& 3-56.4-56-6-4-5.4.56.4.5-56-1, 2).

The composition was first rung (in shortened form) in 2007, and forms the basis for longer lengths of royal to be attempted shortly – sadly John isn’t around to complete his good work. The effort to expand the composition has involved some additions from David Hull and some very recent distributed further progress. Watch this space…

234567890

573920486 Beginning

648203957 Kenilworth Road

089674523 Loftus Road

860492735 Bristol

907856342 Stinking Bishop

795038264 Nideggen

426385079 Otterbourne

352749608 Bramall Lane

- 908674523 Savernake

897056342 Kegworth

069482735 Fereneze

640293857 Gresty Road

234567089 Burnden Park

352748690 Allington

573829406 St Neots

- 906482735 Burnley

698074523 Jugsholme

867950342 Kananga

785639204 Lufkin

420395678 Thimbleby

352748069 Essex

234507986 Clifton

- 904263857 Quixwood

573826049 Craven Cottage

785634290 Kings Norton

867459302 Southampton University

496082735 Goldfinger

352708964 City Ground

230597486 Stratford upon Avon

- 902345678 Elgin

4) Further improvements in two-part tenors-together compositions – 1654327880 partends

· Yorkshire Surprise – Mark Davies - 2002

· Yorkshire Surprise – David Pipe – 2009

· Bristol Surprise – John Warboys – c2006

Whilst many previous examples of two-part compositions involved the partend 1243657890, the decade saw the emergence of some interesting examples with a partend 1654327890.

This framework is elegant, with the clear attraction that wherever a run involving bells 2,3,4,5,6 appears in the first half of the composition, a corresponding reverse run will delight in the second half.

[This effect isn’t guaranteed in 2-parts with a 124365 partend – see for example the 2nd part of Chris Poole’s 5080 #2 (MIVMHHMW)

Mark Davies created some 2-parts of Yorkshire on this new plan in 2002, though waited 7 years before publishing (after a very tidy new DJP composition on this theme was published);

5040 Yorkshire Surprise Royal (DJP)

M W H 23456

- 2 24536

2 3 43526

- X 65432

2-part

X=16

5040 Yorkshire Surprise Royal, arr MBD (SMC32)

No.1 (local scope)

23456 M W B H

24536 - 2

53624 - x

46325 - -

24365 -

53462 - -

65432 -

2 part, x = 16

5040 Yorkshire Surprise Royal, arr MBD (SMC32)

No.2 (local scope)

M W H 23456

- - 64352

2 2 53462

s s 24365

s 23465

s - 65432

2 part

John Warboys, Don Morrison and other have also explored this effect. A simple example by John is his Bristol Royal:

5040 Bristol S. Royal
23456 V O I
35426 -
32546 2 -
46325 - 2
43652 x
65432 - -
2-part. x = 167890.
All courses contain little-bell music.

5) Bespoke single-method compositions of Bristol Royal – David Hull – various

Also

· Bristol / Triton / Yorkshire – Chris Poole

· Eg Jennie’s Endeavour – Mark Davies

There are different schools of thought about Bristol Royal peal compositions. Neat tenors-together peals, especially two-parts, are well-suited to 8ths place calls. (John Warboys’ example above being just one example).

Indeed, Mark Davies goes so far to stated on his website that,

“From a musical perspective, Bristol Royal is better with 8th's place bobs; with an average of only just over one call per course possible with 4th's place bobs, the linking possibilities are very slim, making it very hard to stay in good courses and avoid the bad. 4th's place calls are also bad news for those who like their course-end rollups”

I feel this is too much of a generalisation. As mentioned in the introduction, Bristol Royal ringing and compositions have undergone a renaissance in the past decade. Much of this has been down to bespoke compositions, many by David Hull.

David’s use of the four-lead block 1,2,4 to achieve the magnificent six transition has already been mentioned. Similar motifs, such as the six-lead block S2.S4.S6 to act as a cyclic shunt (whilst going from forward to reverse runs) are also very well employed in his compositions.

An example well-rounded composition illustrative of the progress is:

5002 Bristol Surprise Royal (no.10)

234567890 Leads

243 SH

56342 SM.W

7654382 7ths.Out

902345678 1.3 3

987654320 7.13 21

357924680 1.2.4 4

627384950 1.2.4 4

987654230 S1.2.4 4

432567890 3.9.11 11

423 SH

(53624) M.W

24365 M.SW.SH

(42536) W.M.SW

First rung at Northallerton, 21 July 2007

It should be mentioned that various other composers have played with neat transition blocks as well. For example, Chris Poole has various nice compositions here – in Bristol he uses 7 & 8 lead courses called (3, 4½) and (2½, 4) for a cyclic shift (alternating the stroke of runs also), whilst analogous 8 & 9 lead blocks in Triton called (1, 3) also lead to notable compositions:

5160 Triton Delight Royal

234567890

----------------------------

354769820 1 3 (8)

456789023 1 3 (9)

576982043 1 3 (8)

678902345 1 3 (9)

798204365 1 3 (8)

890234567 1 3 (9)

920436587 1 3 (8)

023456789 1 3 (9)

243657089 1 4 (8)

243659078 5 (9)

243657890 4 5 (9)

34625 1 3 5 8 (8)

64523 1 (9)

35426 1 9 (9)

23456 8 (9)

As a related example, Chris has also exploited the simple effect of calling pairs of bobs on a series of bells to achieve a nice simple Yorkshire composition from 2001:

5162 Yorkshire Surprise Royal (No. 2)

234567890

--------------------------

902345678 2,10,11,19 (23)

789023456 2,10,11,19 (23)

543209876 2,10 (16)

765432098 2,10,11,19 (23)

987654320 2,10,11,19 (23)

524367890 2,10,12 (16)

(324) s5

Call paired bobs on 10-6, 6-10 followed by W sW.

Finally in this section I feel it’s appropriate to highlight an example of a bespoke composition in a great new method. I’ve selected this composition of the previously-mentioned Jennie's Endeavour Surprise Royal – both the method and composition are by Mark Davies.

The method is f-group royal with a feature that appeared a number of times in new methods over the decade: regular handstroke half-leads (so backrounds appears in the plain course at handstroke).

The consequence of this is that calls at the half-lead have the opposite effect to leadend calls. In MBD’s words,

“This means rapid and unexpected jumps from one position to another can be carried out, and without having to trawl through undesirable leads. Part of the goal of this peal was to provide something really exciting and unpredictable, so the band never knows what is going to come up next”

The composition makes good use of this property, utilising four types of calls to pack in a varied heap of music. The method is coursing-dominated, and to exploit this the composition also contains sections of what MBD slightly ambitiously calls “tittums” (here four consecutive bells coursing). Again, to quote the loquacious MBD,

“Coursing orders are often revisited unexpectedly, and the same backbell positions are brought up in different ways. Both the front bells and the back bells are turned around on average more than once a course, but despite the dynamic movement the little bells remain throughout the peal in coursing orders which provide runs of varying kinds”

5000 Jennie's Endeavour Surprise Royal

234567890

---------

65432 1 8 9 (MWH)

62345 3½ 4½ 5½ 8

43526 1 8 (MW)

435267089 4

243657890 3½ X 7½

325460987 s3½ s4 s5 s5½ 8 9

674523890 3½ s4 4½ s5 5½ 7

634527089 4 s7

234569078 s1 5

354269870 3 3½ 4½ s7½ 9

645237890 ½ s4 4½ 5½ 8½

645239078 4 5

632547890 ½ 3½ 4½ 5½ 8 8½

23456 1 (M)

---------

4th's place calls at lead end, with:

½ = half-lead bob, pn 70

s½ = half-lead single, pn 7890

X = big bob before (pn 16, lead 4)

Contains:

Entire plain course

7 567890

5 657890

9 098765 off the front

193 LB4

113 LB5

46 xxxxxx0987/7890xxxxxx

7 xxxxx09876/67890xxxxx

38 leads in the Tittums

...and various other goodies.

6) Mega-tittums on 10 – David Pipe and Philip Earis – 2006 onwards

Following on from the previous composition, a much more complete tittums effect can be achieved if every consecutive bell is coursing. And whilst there had already been a trend in recent years of compositions using more tittums-style coursing orders, such as (7)65432, the “mega tittums” effect of all consecutive bells coursing was really exploited for the first time in the decade.

To easily get the bells in the mega-tittums order from the plain course, a sequence of bobs of different sizes can be used in the same carefully selected calling position (for example in royal, 8ths, 6ths and 4ths place bobs when the tenor runs out).

In a more conventional tenors-together framework, a lone 4ths place call will go into mega-tittums from coursing order 65432. The tenors-together composition below, predominantly with 8ths place bobs, illustrates things nicely.

5000 Bristol S Royal (DJP)

----------------------

V O I H 23456

- 34256

- - 45362

-* 453627089

3 - - 563427890

- - 34562

- - 46325

- - 64523

2 3 - 42356

- 23456

---------------------

* 4ths place call

The more bells there are, and the more coursing-dominated the chosen method is, the more incredible the mega-tittums effect. We’ll have to wait for 12 bells and higher stages before manifestations of the full glory of mega-tittums though…

7) Spliced Surprise (9-14m), tenors together, atw – Richard Pearce – Summer 2001

The decade has also seen clever arrangements of more “old school” one-part spliced royal, keeping the tenors together whilst preserving the all-the-work property.

Building on work of Roddy Horton and Graham John, Richard Pearce has created a series of tenors-together spliced in 9-14 methods on this plan.

As explained in the comprehensive ringing-theory message of December 2006 (http://www.bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2006-December/001666.html), the composition is based on sets of courses with the bells in 2nds, 5ths and 6ths rotated. This allows some familiar methods to be included, along with a change of method every lead and a fairly even method distribution.

5160 (14 methods)
23456 M W H
53462 s s R/LEGL/YSRYSRY
63452 s SR/EGLE
53426 s s G/Y/L
42365 s s - EGLE/S/G/
52364 s AKIAKIAK/DC
62354 s ND/IAKIAKIA
(52364) s K/
34265 s - CNDCN/I/
23465 - BPBPBP/
63425 s LEGLEGLE/R
42356 s s - YSRYSRY/GLEG/SRYSRYS/
(52346) s DC/
62345 s AKIAKIA/ND
52346 s CNDCNDC/K
34256 s - I/NDCNDCN/
64253 s R/B
(54236) s s PBPBP/C/
23456 s - BPBPBP/L/
400 each Cambridge, London No 3, Rutland; 360 each Anglia, Bristol, Eardleigh, Irvine, Kegworth (G), Kinross, Lincolnshire (N), Nideggen (D), Pudsey, Superlative No 2, Yorkshire; 128 com, atw.

==See Also==
*[[Compositions of the Decade 1 - Introduction]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 2 - Doubles]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 3 - Minor]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 4 - Triples]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 5 - Major]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 6 - Caters]]
[[Category: Composition Reviews]]

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 7 - Royal

2009-12-16T16:16:09Z

Pje24: Created page with '__NOTOC__ ===A Review by Philip Earis - continued=== Royal ringing has greatly improved over the decade, becoming much sharper and more focused. Progress has occurred across the …'

__NOTOC__
===A Review by Philip Earis - continued===
Royal ringing has greatly improved over the decade, becoming much sharper and more focused. Progress has occurred across the board, with a shift to better established methods, the appearance of some cracking and daring new methods, and a trend towards smarter and neater “runny” compositions, without fear of conventional dogmas.

These trends have been further extrapolated with the widespread development of both cyclic compositions, along with some great new cyclic methods also. Furthermore, as we shall see other very new types of compositions have also established a foothold.

===Established Methods===
Turning first to single-method peals in established methods, the decade has enjoyed a marked transition towards better methods with more musical potential.

Ten-bell peal numbers overall seem to show a sustained rise compared with the 1990s. Peals of Yorkshire royal are up 25%.

However, the biggest trend by far has been the stratospheric rise in Bristol. There have been 718 peals of Bristol Royal published so far since the beginning of the year 2000, a massive 120% rise on the 326 from the 1990s. Peal bands around the country, perhaps especially in the North West, have been attracted to the beautiful elegance and music potential of the method, and their thirst for the nectar of musical compositions has been a force for progress.

Happily, there has also been a reduction in some of the nastier elements of 10-bell ringing. Peals of Rutland are down 37%, Pudsey down 43%, and spliced in 8 methods (which on ten almost invariably means one thing) down 24%.

===New methods – “regular”===
It has been a great decade for new royal methods. Triton Delight - quite simply London Royal with music off the front - was first pealed in May 1999, and there have subsequently been over 60 repeat performances. Whilst this is an indicator of progress, it is sadly a sign of some conductors’ intransigence that there have still been an order of magnitude more peals of London. This gap will surely be further eroded in the years ahead.

The two other great royal methods of the 1990s – Normanby Surprise, and Brave New World – set the scene for the developments of the 2000s. Neither stuck to tired and pointless limiting conventions – Normanby is a super double mx method with 3 consecutive blows, whilst Brave New World eschewed both conventional symmetry and plain bob leadheads to launch a cyclic odyssey.

The new methods of the present decade have continued and developed these trends, to impressive effect. Mark Davies has led the charge with “regular” (ie plain bob leadhead), coursing-dominated methods, including:

Black Pearl: &-5-4.5-2.3.2-9.8.9-6.7-6-1,1
Snow Tiger: &3-5.4-5-3.2-9.8-6-7.6-8.9,2
Raspberry Crumble: &3-5.4-5-3-2-8-56.4.3.2-8.9,2
Jennie’s Endeavour: &3-5.4-5-3-3478-58-6-7.6-8.9,2

Whilst there is little point in breaking conventions just for the sake of it, there is even less point in conventions existing just for the sake of it. It is good to see innovative examples of methods with 9ths in the notation above the treble, for just about the first time. These allow, inter alia, elegant double methods like Snow Tiger.

Incidentally, whilst I think I first published the figures for double method Snow Tiger (Royal), Mark claims an independent earlier discovery, and links it with his eponymous delight maximus method. The method is certainly good enough to fight over.

===New methods – cyclic glory===

In parallel to the above, the early years of the decade saw the arrival of a string of cyclic methods – ie methods with leadheads that are rotations of rounds. Cyclic methods cannot have conventional palindromic symmetry (at least not if started at the symmetry point). However, other symmetries can be used. The super new major method Anglia Cyclic (+-1-2367-1-7-5-36-4-2) employed rotational symmetry, but here on ten bells two new method stand out:

Double Resurrection (+-678-67-1-7-9-345-45-1-4-2)
Spinning Jennie (&56.3-4.5.2-1-34-5.36.4-1.56.8.56.1,1)

The very simple right-place plain method Double Resurrection uses glide symmetry to great effect, whilst MBD’s Spinning Jennie cleverly is conventionally double (building on a Philip Saddleton idea), nominally with irregular leadheads, but is started at the treble snap to magically produce a clever cyclic method.

These both offer an incredibly concentrated musical experience and are really pleasurable to ring. If there’s one thing you take home from this whole series of articles, it should be to try ringing some cyclic royal.

===Composition trends===
The vast majority of royal peals rung continue to be in regular (ie plain bob leadhead) methods. And the compositions for these – both in what has been produced and in what is frequently rung - have both leapt forward over the decade.

Continuing a previous trend, little-bell runs have been very much at the fore – the progress is such that any new royal composition citing a “CRU” count would be laughed out of court. Compositional footnotes like “All courses contain little-bell music” have not only appeared, but become much more common - yardsticks, even.

Indeed, the trend towards runs has been extrapolated to cyclic compositions also - both pure cyclic 9- and 10-parts, and compositions including cyclic transitions, have featured prominently.

Cyclic compositions are especially attractive – and have become almost the default – in spliced, offering an easy yet potentially really musical way to achieve all-the-work for all the method. Indeed, the decade has seen the emergence of the first adventurous “bespoke” peals of spliced royal, with the methods customised to maximise the composition’s music, as we shall see.

Bespoke compositions have also taken off in single method peals, especially Bristol Royal. David Hull has led the way here – the method’s flexibility allows different tastes to be catered for. The trend has continued to other, less compliant methods – Graham Bradshaw has done some good work trying to squeeze music from Cambridge, for example (I haven’t selected these below, but see www.ringing.org for examples).

Clever tricks have also improved straight 14-course tenors-together compositions in single methods. Two-parts with just calls at M, W and H are very common, and many people might have thought all possibilities had been exhausted by the end of the 1990s. However, such 2-part compositions have expanded beyond just straight 1243657890 partend changes, with some interesting developments with 1654327890 partends.

Just like with major, a mixture of pencil-and-paper logic and the raw power of the SMC32 software have meant that many better royal compositions have been produced.

As an aside, I have no qualms about using the word “better” – with orchestral music, it’s very subjective and not meaningful to compare Mahler and Handel with a view to ranking them. However, change ringing’s constraints and formalisms mean that any effect (and hence any set of compositions) can be quantised in a systematic way. The only input is choosing a suitable metric to compare. Over the decade different composers’ metrics have started to converge, I feel, and whilst complete convergence is unrealistic (and arguably undesirable), there is still some way to go to avoid people talking across each other.

Moreover, royal compositions have seen much acceptance and uptake of less conventional calls, when used to good effect. Calls at 7ths, and indeed different bobs such as 16, 18, 123456 have all appeared, and also led to improvements in simple 2-part compositions.

Using multiple types of calls can be an elegant way to get all consecutive bells coursing, and other new types of compositions based on this “mega tittums” plan have made their first appearance. 10 bells are just about enough for the effect to be pronounced and effective.

===Summary===
Like standing on high ground and admiring the vista behind after a long walk, it’s an exhilarating time to survey the progress in 10-bell ringing. The march towards even higher ground needs to continue. Let’s just hope that the broader body of ringers catch up with the advances, and these are better reflected in what is actually frequently rung.

==1) Further improvements in two-part tenors-together compositions==

· Triton Delight – David Hull et al – 2003

· Yorkshire Surprise – Mark Davies - 2004

I’ve selected David’s Triton as the lead typical example of how simple tenors-together compositions have got better in recent decades. The grounds for inclusion could be questioned here – the composition is an improved tweak from Don Morrison based on the 1990s Hull little-bell classic “the fluke”, whilst the method has similarities to London (the overwork and leadhead group), but with substantially more music under the treble. Overall, though, I feel this shows what can be simply achieved which in the past simply was not achieved:

23456 M W H

42356 -

65324 - - -

43526 - -

25634 - -

34562 - s s

56342 - -

24365 - - -

Repeat

Touch contains:

Odd Even Total

xxxx567890 = 0 + 14 = 14

xxxx657890 = 0 + 14 = 14

xxxxxx2345 = 12 + 12 = 24

xxxxxx5432 = 12 + 12 = 24

xxxxxx3456 = 24 + 24 = 48

xxxxxx6543 = 24 + 24 = 48

0987xxxxxx = 70 + 0 = 70

7890xxxxxx = 42 + 0 = 42

2345xxxxxx = 8 + 8 = 16

5432xxxxxx = 6 + 6 = 12

3456xxxxxx = 14 + 14 = 28

6543xxxxxx = 14 + 14 = 28

MBD also claims a re-arrangement, changing two pairs of bobs for singles, but without extra musical gain. He’s on less shaky ground when he turns to Yorkshire. The composition below contains a great spread of little-bell music, both in variety of runs and in its distribution in the composition. The finish is especially nice, going from 24653 to 53246 in the last course of the peal.

In Mark’s words, “This is my absolute favourite conventional two-part… 3.5 courses of the last part are in LB5 coursing orders. I think it's absolutely fascinating that such a result is possible from a two-part structure: a very simple structure, too, that really just boils down to 2W 2H repeated, padded. To ring, it's possibly even better than the best one-part -very-nearly-almost as much music, plus all the fun of watching the second part unfold knowing what the first has foretold. Magic”. Indeed.

5040 Yorkshire (No.1)

23456 M W H

---------------

24356 s

53462 s 2 2

46325 s s -

53624 - -

24365 - s s

---------------

2 part

Contains:

13 567890

13 657890

53 LB5

104 3456/6543

60 2345/5432

10 4567/7654

2) Cyclic method compositions

· Double Resurrection Cyclic Bob – Andrew Tibbetts – 2003

· Spinning Jennie Delight – David Pipe - 2003

As described above, Double Resurrection is a fantastic yet simple right-place plain cyclic method. It has an efficient structure and glide symmetry, leading to reverse runs round every half-lead, and forward runs round every leadhead.

The composition below is the first to combine the excellent “magnificent 6” rounds -> queens transition on 10 bells with the benefit of a cyclic method to fully exploit the effect. And the effect is truly mesmerising. I find it hard to fully describe its joys to those who haven’t experienced it.

1234567890 (rounds)
----------
1357924680 (queens)
1594837260 (reverse tittums)
1987654320 (reverse rounds)
1864297530 (reverse queens)
1627384950 (tittums)
1234567890 (rounds)

The plain nature of the method means that varied music appears very frequently, in a continuous “music box” demonstration. This, coupled with the rapid forward / reverse nature of the music, further magnify the effect. Both the tittums and queens block cycles (and their reverses) sound much more appealing than you might naively expect.

(Of course, when the composition is in the “reverse rounds” section, the forward runs appear around the half-lead)

The remainder of the composition consists of singled-in courses to provide a joyful variation on the theme. It’s awesome.

5040 Double Resurrection (#6)

5 6 7 8 9 234567890

ss ss s ss 324

s s 243

(a) 357924680

ss s 375

(a) 594837260

s 549

(a) 987654320

6 ss s 978

(a) 864297530

ss s 846

(a) 627384950

s 672

(b) 432567890

s 423

s s 234567890

(a)=2,s3,s5,7,8,9,s12 (12 leads)

Of course, the “magnificent six” transition can also be captured in a composition using methods with plain bob leadheads. The four-lead block 1,2,4 has been used in a number of David Hull Bristol Royal compositions to achieve this effect (more on this later), and can be extrapolated to a whole peal composition. Rob Lee put together the following:

5220 Double Coslany/10440 Bristol:

234567890
---------------------
1, 2, 4 864297530
1, 2, 4 594837260
4 602374859
2, 3, 4 972640853
2, 3, 4 342907856
s1, s8, 9 345678902
---------------------

9 part. Contains the 54 cycles of rounds, queens & tittums and reverses thereof.

This exploits the regular nature of the method, using half the plain course to join up the reverse tittums/tittums and reverse rounds/rounds positions. As Rob explains,

“…Doing this means that some of the part ends occur at handstroke instead of backstroke, and so the 1,2,4 block is used in reverse when this is the case. Unfortunately, the cyclic part end obtained is 567890234 which means rounds occurs after 3 parts. A bit of fiddling around solves this, but at the expense of a bit of symmetry/music”

Going back to cyclic methods, a further example of what can be achieved is with the treble-dodging method Spinning Jennie. The method is conventionally double with the following notation:

&56.3-4.5.2-1-34-5.36.4-1.56.8.56.1, 1 = 1485309627

However, ringing this starting away from the symmetry point brings up the cyclic method:

+x4.5.2x1x34x5.36.4x1.56.8.56.1.56.8.56.1x4.36.5x34x1x2.5.4x3.56.1.56.3 = 1345678902

The music isn’t as concentrated or dare I say pronounced as Resurrection, but still allows some very interesting effects. David Pipe put together the following composition, designed to bring out the runs given by the method.

5000 Spinning Jennie Delight Royal

1234567890

-------------------------------------

1543267890 s4.s4½

1452367890 3.4

1325476980 s4.s4½.s7.s9

1325476809 9

1234568709 3.4.7

1345627890 s1.3.5.s8

1436578902 3.4.7.9

1243658709 7.8 (8 leads)

1243658079 s9

1243650987 s½.8.9

1234569078 4.5.8.9

1234560987 8.9

1325460897 3.4.s9

1234567890 s½.3.4

-------------------------------------

Backstroke-snap start and finish.

Bob = 38, Single = 389 both made at the backstroke-snap.

Half-lead single = 89

There remains an opportunity for a magnificent 6 style composition here, I feel.

3) Bespoke cyclic royal compositions – David Pipe – April 2003 / October 2003

David Pipe’s 9-part and 10-part spliced royal compositions are a sort of contraction of his classic maximus compositions on a similar plan.

The methods in the royal peals – named after James Bond villains – are all custom-designed to yield a feast of music in the leads they appear in the composition. The new methods used, such as Goldfinger, are also intrinsically very attractive.

A link method is used to move the bells between the cyclic parts. The main block of the composition has the 2nd and the tenor of that cyclic part (so in the 9-part composition, bells 5 and 6 in the first part) alternately ringing “pivot leads”, ie the leads where they are the pivot bell.

Pivot leads are almost invariably the most musical in a method, and this structure yields a great way to ring as many plain leads in the part as possible, benefitting from an elegant palindromic structure which leads to a great balance of forward and reverse runs in each part.

Unlike maximus, a cyclic royal composition of primarily treble-dodging (single-dodging) methods needs to contain more than just the plain leads from each cyclic part to take the length over 5000 changes. In the Pipe compositions, the “padding” is based on two blocks of three bobs.

“Padding” is an unfair word as these sections are also very well-chosen, though. Custom-designed methods are again used for the best effect – for example, Kananga, which yields limited music off the front in the plain course, but much more in the 243 course in which it actually appears in the composition.

All in all, two finely crafted examples. (David Hull also has a similar, later composition containing methods with “opposite” pivot bells)

5022 Spliced Royal (8m)

234567890 Oddjob Little Alliance

-453028967 Ourumov Surprise

342590786 Zorin Surprise

-345028967 Kananga Surprise

-534028967 Scaramanga Alliance

452390786 Goldfinger Surprise

305846279 Dr No Differential Surprise

249573608 Blofeld Alliance

083657492 Blofeld Alliance

927465830 Dr No Differential Surprise

860739524 Goldfinger Surprise

796284053 Scaramanga Alliance

-867902345 Kananga Surprise

-786902345 Zorin Surprise

897264053 Ourumov Surprise

-678902345

9 part

720 each Dr No Differential S., Goldfinger S., Kananaga S.,

Ouromov S., Zorin S.; 648 each Blofeld A., Scaramanga A.;

126 Oddjob Little A.; 125 changes of method, all the work

5000 Spliced Royal (8m)

8901234567 Nick Nack

-------------------------------------

-1908674523 Largo Alliance

1897056342 Zorin Surprise

-1890674523 Kananga Surprise

-1089674523 Scaramanga Alliance

1907856342 Drax Little Alliance

1860492735 Dr No Differential

1795038264 Jaws Little Alliance

1648203957 Jaws Little Alliance

1573920486 Dr No Differential

1426385079 Drax Little Alliance

1352749608 Scaramanga Alliance

-1423567890 Kananga Surprise

-1342567890 Zorin Surprise

1453729608 Largo Alliance

-1234567890

-------------------------------------

10 part

800 Dr No Differential S, Kananga S, Zorin S; 640 Largo A; 600 Jaws Little A; 560 Drax Little A, Elektra A; 240 Nick Nack Differential Little Hybrid; 139 changes of method, All the work for all 10 bells

24 each 123456, 234567, 345678, 456789, 567890 at the back

In a related field, the late John Leary put together a series of 30 spliced royal methods in a cyclic 9-part construction. Whilst this doesn’t have the same bespoke qualities of the Pipe compositions (for example lacking a pivot-lead structure in the plain course), it contains many interesting methods and neat leads.

The composition is simply four bobs at Before to bring up the cyclic part-end 1902345678. The methods are well-structured, with some very nice new methods created for the peal (see for example Bramall Lane, b& 3-56.4-56-6-4-5.4.56.4.5-56-1, 2).

The composition was first rung (in shortened form) in 2007, and forms the basis for longer lengths of royal to be attempted shortly – sadly John isn’t around to complete his good work. The effort to expand the composition has involved some additions from David Hull and some very recent distributed further progress. Watch this space…

234567890

573920486 Beginning

648203957 Kenilworth Road

089674523 Loftus Road

860492735 Bristol

907856342 Stinking Bishop

795038264 Nideggen

426385079 Otterbourne

352749608 Bramall Lane

- 908674523 Savernake

897056342 Kegworth

069482735 Fereneze

640293857 Gresty Road

234567089 Burnden Park

352748690 Allington

573829406 St Neots

- 906482735 Burnley

698074523 Jugsholme

867950342 Kananga

785639204 Lufkin

420395678 Thimbleby

352748069 Essex

234507986 Clifton

- 904263857 Quixwood

573826049 Craven Cottage

785634290 Kings Norton

867459302 Southampton University

496082735 Goldfinger

352708964 City Ground

230597486 Stratford upon Avon

- 902345678 Elgin

4) Further improvements in two-part tenors-together compositions – 1654327880 partends

· Yorkshire Surprise – Mark Davies - 2002

· Yorkshire Surprise – David Pipe – 2009

· Bristol Surprise – John Warboys – c2006

Whilst many previous examples of two-part compositions involved the partend 1243657890, the decade saw the emergence of some interesting examples with a partend 1654327890.

This framework is elegant, with the clear attraction that wherever a run involving bells 2,3,4,5,6 appears in the first half of the composition, a corresponding reverse run will delight in the second half.

[This effect isn’t guaranteed in 2-parts with a 124365 partend – see for example the 2nd part of Chris Poole’s 5080 #2 (MIVMHHMW)

Mark Davies created some 2-parts of Yorkshire on this new plan in 2002, though waited 7 years before publishing (after a very tidy new DJP composition on this theme was published);

5040 Yorkshire Surprise Royal (DJP)

M W H 23456

- 2 24536

2 3 43526

- X 65432

2-part

X=16

5040 Yorkshire Surprise Royal, arr MBD (SMC32)

No.1 (local scope)

23456 M W B H

24536 - 2

53624 - x

46325 - -

24365 -

53462 - -

65432 -

2 part, x = 16

5040 Yorkshire Surprise Royal, arr MBD (SMC32)

No.2 (local scope)

M W H 23456

- - 64352

2 2 53462

s s 24365

s 23465

s - 65432

2 part

John Warboys, Don Morrison and other have also explored this effect. A simple example by John is his Bristol Royal:

5040 Bristol S. Royal
23456 V O I
35426 -
32546 2 -
46325 - 2
43652 x
65432 - -
2-part. x = 167890.
All courses contain little-bell music.

5) Bespoke single-method compositions of Bristol Royal – David Hull – various

Also

· Bristol / Triton / Yorkshire – Chris Poole

· Eg Jennie’s Endeavour – Mark Davies

There are different schools of thought about Bristol Royal peal compositions. Neat tenors-together peals, especially two-parts, are well-suited to 8ths place calls. (John Warboys’ example above being just one example).

Indeed, Mark Davies goes so far to stated on his website that,

“From a musical perspective, Bristol Royal is better with 8th's place bobs; with an average of only just over one call per course possible with 4th's place bobs, the linking possibilities are very slim, making it very hard to stay in good courses and avoid the bad. 4th's place calls are also bad news for those who like their course-end rollups”

I feel this is too much of a generalisation. As mentioned in the introduction, Bristol Royal ringing and compositions have undergone a renaissance in the past decade. Much of this has been down to bespoke compositions, many by David Hull.

David’s use of the four-lead block 1,2,4 to achieve the magnificent six transition has already been mentioned. Similar motifs, such as the six-lead block S2.S4.S6 to act as a cyclic shunt (whilst going from forward to reverse runs) are also very well employed in his compositions.

An example well-rounded composition illustrative of the progress is:

5002 Bristol Surprise Royal (no.10)

234567890 Leads

243 SH

56342 SM.W

7654382 7ths.Out

902345678 1.3 3

987654320 7.13 21

357924680 1.2.4 4

627384950 1.2.4 4

987654230 S1.2.4 4

432567890 3.9.11 11

423 SH

(53624) M.W

24365 M.SW.SH

(42536) W.M.SW

First rung at Northallerton, 21 July 2007

It should be mentioned that various other composers have played with neat transition blocks as well. For example, Chris Poole has various nice compositions here – in Bristol he uses 7 & 8 lead courses called (3, 4½) and (2½, 4) for a cyclic shift (alternating the stroke of runs also), whilst analogous 8 & 9 lead blocks in Triton called (1, 3) also lead to notable compositions:

5160 Triton Delight Royal

234567890

----------------------------

354769820 1 3 (8)

456789023 1 3 (9)

576982043 1 3 (8)

678902345 1 3 (9)

798204365 1 3 (8)

890234567 1 3 (9)

920436587 1 3 (8)

023456789 1 3 (9)

243657089 1 4 (8)

243659078 5 (9)

243657890 4 5 (9)

34625 1 3 5 8 (8)

64523 1 (9)

35426 1 9 (9)

23456 8 (9)

As a related example, Chris has also exploited the simple effect of calling pairs of bobs on a series of bells to achieve a nice simple Yorkshire composition from 2001:

5162 Yorkshire Surprise Royal (No. 2)

234567890

--------------------------

902345678 2,10,11,19 (23)

789023456 2,10,11,19 (23)

543209876 2,10 (16)

765432098 2,10,11,19 (23)

987654320 2,10,11,19 (23)

524367890 2,10,12 (16)

(324) s5

Call paired bobs on 10-6, 6-10 followed by W sW.

Finally in this section I feel it’s appropriate to highlight an example of a bespoke composition in a great new method. I’ve selected this composition of the previously-mentioned Jennie's Endeavour Surprise Royal – both the method and composition are by Mark Davies.

The method is f-group royal with a feature that appeared a number of times in new methods over the decade: regular handstroke half-leads (so backrounds appears in the plain course at handstroke).

The consequence of this is that calls at the half-lead have the opposite effect to leadend calls. In MBD’s words,

“This means rapid and unexpected jumps from one position to another can be carried out, and without having to trawl through undesirable leads. Part of the goal of this peal was to provide something really exciting and unpredictable, so the band never knows what is going to come up next”

The composition makes good use of this property, utilising four types of calls to pack in a varied heap of music. The method is coursing-dominated, and to exploit this the composition also contains sections of what MBD slightly ambitiously calls “tittums” (here four consecutive bells coursing). Again, to quote the loquacious MBD,

“Coursing orders are often revisited unexpectedly, and the same backbell positions are brought up in different ways. Both the front bells and the back bells are turned around on average more than once a course, but despite the dynamic movement the little bells remain throughout the peal in coursing orders which provide runs of varying kinds”

5000 Jennie's Endeavour Surprise Royal

234567890

---------

65432 1 8 9 (MWH)

62345 3½ 4½ 5½ 8

43526 1 8 (MW)

435267089 4

243657890 3½ X 7½

325460987 s3½ s4 s5 s5½ 8 9

674523890 3½ s4 4½ s5 5½ 7

634527089 4 s7

234569078 s1 5

354269870 3 3½ 4½ s7½ 9

645237890 ½ s4 4½ 5½ 8½

645239078 4 5

632547890 ½ 3½ 4½ 5½ 8 8½

23456 1 (M)

---------

4th's place calls at lead end, with:

½ = half-lead bob, pn 70

s½ = half-lead single, pn 7890

X = big bob before (pn 16, lead 4)

Contains:

Entire plain course

7 567890

5 657890

9 098765 off the front

193 LB4

113 LB5

46 xxxxxx0987/7890xxxxxx

7 xxxxx09876/67890xxxxx

38 leads in the Tittums

...and various other goodies.

6) Mega-tittums on 10 – David Pipe and Philip Earis – 2006 onwards

Following on from the previous composition, a much more complete tittums effect can be achieved if every consecutive bell is coursing. And whilst there had already been a trend in recent years of compositions using more tittums-style coursing orders, such as (7)65432, the “mega tittums” effect of all consecutive bells coursing was really exploited for the first time in the decade.

To easily get the bells in the mega-tittums order from the plain course, a sequence of bobs of different sizes can be used in the same carefully selected calling position (for example in royal, 8ths, 6ths and 4ths place bobs when the tenor runs out).

In a more conventional tenors-together framework, a lone 4ths place call will go into mega-tittums from coursing order 65432. The tenors-together composition below, predominantly with 8ths place bobs, illustrates things nicely.

5000 Bristol S Royal (DJP)

----------------------

V O I H 23456

- 34256

- - 45362

-* 453627089

3 - - 563427890

- - 34562

- - 46325

- - 64523

2 3 - 42356

- 23456

---------------------

* 4ths place call

The more bells there are, and the more coursing-dominated the chosen method is, the more incredible the mega-tittums effect. We’ll have to wait for 12 bells and higher stages before manifestations of the full glory of mega-tittums though…

7) Spliced Surprise (9-14m), tenors together, atw – Richard Pearce – Summer 2001

The decade has also seen clever arrangements of more “old school” one-part spliced royal, keeping the tenors together whilst preserving the all-the-work property.

Building on work of Roddy Horton and Graham John, Richard Pearce has created a series of tenors-together spliced in 9-14 methods on this plan.

As explained in the comprehensive ringing-theory message of December 2006 (http://www.bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2006-December/001666.html), the composition is based on sets of courses with the bells in 2nds, 5ths and 6ths rotated. This allows some familiar methods to be included, along with a change of method every lead and a fairly even method distribution.

5160 (14 methods)
23456 M W H
53462 s s R/LEGL/YSRYSRY
63452 s SR/EGLE
53426 s s G/Y/L
42365 s s - EGLE/S/G/
52364 s AKIAKIAK/DC
62354 s ND/IAKIAKIA
(52364) s K/
34265 s - CNDCN/I/
23465 - BPBPBP/
63425 s LEGLEGLE/R
42356 s s - YSRYSRY/GLEG/SRYSRYS/
(52346) s DC/
62345 s AKIAKIA/ND
52346 s CNDCNDC/K
34256 s - I/NDCNDCN/
64253 s R/B
(54236) s s PBPBP/C/
23456 s - BPBPBP/L/
400 each Cambridge, London No 3, Rutland; 360 each Anglia, Bristol, Eardleigh, Irvine, Kegworth (G), Kinross, Lincolnshire (N), Nideggen (D), Pudsey, Superlative No 2, Yorkshire; 128 com, atw.

==See Also==
*[[Compositions of the Decade 1 - Introduction]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 2 - Doubles]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 3 - Minor]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 4 - Triples]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 5 - Major]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 6 - Caters]]
[[Category: Composition Reviews]]

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 1 - Introduction

2009-12-16T16:12:23Z

Pje24:

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 6 - Caters

2009-12-14T09:48:33Z

Pje24:

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 2 - Doubles

2009-12-11T22:31:08Z

Pje24:

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 3 - Minor

2009-12-11T22:30:40Z

Pje24:

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 4 - Triples

2009-12-11T22:30:05Z

Pje24:

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 6 - Caters

2009-12-11T22:29:06Z

Pje24:

__NOTOC__
===A Review by Philip Earis - continued===

It’s hard to know what to say about Caters. And whilst you could interpret that as I don’t know what I’m saying about Caters, there is some clear evidence suggesting that there isn’t in fact much new to say. The stage is really rather moribund in many regards. Whether a cause, an effect or both, it undoubtedly remains dominated by Stedman and Grandsire.

You just have to look at some of the key indicators of innovation:

* There hasn’t been a meaningful long length of Caters since March 1990.
* There have been only 7 new Caters methods rung in the past decade. 6 of these are non-descript simple plain methods. Only one is of note – the cyclic and rotationally symmetric principle Flada, rung in Oxford in 2004. Things like Differentials, hybrids and so on all seems to have passed Caters by completely.
* There has only really been one peal of spliced Caters in the past decade. And the emergence of spliced Caters and Royal has only gone to show it’s not easy to achieve a synergistic effect.
* There has been only one handbell peal in the past five years that wasn’t Stedman or Grandsire. And that was Plain Bob.

Indeed, looking at peals.co.uk we see that whilst the total number of peals of Caters seems to have gone up around 10% in the past decade, around 98% of 9-bell peals are either Stedman or Grandsire (with Plain Bob, Erin and Double Norwich making up nearly all the rest)

It almost seems like Caters has turned into a dead zone. It is the stage people ring for a safe peal score or when royal seems a bit tricky, rather than something to be pursued and developed in its own right. This is a great shame, because Caters has so many possibilities and potential.

===The case for the defence===
The likely defence against my argument of stagnation is that innovation, music, excitement and so on can be obtained within the framework of Grandsire or Stedman. Even leaving aside my personal views on the musical qualities and potential of Stedman (the Irish joke about the traveller seeking directions comes to mind), this seems a bit of a bogus response – you don’t find similar arguments at even-bell stages.

Grandsire Caters clearly has many advantages, but even simple but attractive related methods like Double Grandsire (1 peal in the past 25 years) don’t seem to be in the canon.

===Running away===
So what’s been going on in Stedman Caters compositions? Well, the vast majority of compositions still seem to be shuffling deck-chairs on the titanic. You can re-arrange courses of 56s, 65s, so-called “tittums” (3 consecutive bells coursing – I ask you!) until the cows come home, indeed John Hyden has, but the end result is still the same.

Perhaps I’m being unfair. Caters has not been completely immune from trends on other number. The rounds -> queens transition on 10 bells is glorious, especially in methods with coursing music, and has been exploited in elegant multi-part Caters compositions for the first time: a real highlight of the decade. There remains much more scope for related developments.

More generally, there have been very welcome moves towards more bespoke compositions, incorporating cyclic music, and so on. Indeed, on the positive side and for the first time in the centuries Stedman has been rung, the little bells haven’t been completely dropped from the musical equation. This must count as progress.

It’s perhaps a sign of how bad things were in the past that the footnote to Mark Davies’ 2003 composition of 5055 Stedman Caters (no. 2) says, “Believed to be the first performance of a little-bell composition in Stedman's principle”. Any increase of music has got to be a good thing.

===Call of the wild===
The problem is that Stedman disrupts the coursing order, meaning transitions between musical blocks tend to feel forced, and involve lots of bobs, and even when you get there the effect is fleeting anyway. “Chase the row” is the description I give to some of the complex multi-call compositions. Calls can really disrupt the rhythm of ringing. And whilst you can go 25 minutes in a peal of Surprise Maximus without a call, you’ll be lucky to go 25 seconds in many of the complex bespoke peals of Stedman.

The progress in Stedman compositions (with parallels in Grandsire) has come from various directions – David Hull, Mark Eccleston, Rob Lee, Mark Davies, and so on. But is still feels to me at times that people are trying to answer the wrong questions, with the wrong method as a tool.

Mark has been a bit of an evangelist for Caters compositions, especially Grandsire. He invented Flada Caters, and is fizzing with other ideas. In a December 2005 message to the theory list he talked about some of his creations, finishing: “About time some more of these were rung, and not just invented...” I couldn’t agree more.

==1) 54-part Erin Caters – Ander Holroyd – rung May 2003 / November 2004==

This is a fantastic composition in 54-part form, combining a cyclic nine-part structure with the rounds -> queens "magnificent six" transposition, ie:

1234567890 (rounds)
----------
1357924680 (queens)
1594837260 (reverse tittums)
1987654320 (reverse rounds)
1864297530 (reverse queens)
1627384950 (tittums)
1234567890 (rounds)

Erin is the ideal method here, as the regular, unbroken coursing means 5 plain sixes of the method takes you straight from rounds to a “backrounds” six, allowing the method to maximise the music whilst reducing the number of calls.

5022 Erin Caters
123456789
---------
516273849 a
891234567 5b
---------
9-part

a = 1s.6.9s.10.12s.14.15.16.17.18.20s.21.22 (23 sixes)
b = 1s.6s.9s.10.12s.13 (14 sixes)

The original composition was further developed to produce the badboy below:

5076 Erin Caters
123456789
---------
738495162 (a)
975318642 (b)
198765432 (b)
615948372 (b)
468135792 (b)
345678912 (b)
---------
9-part

(a) = s1.s6.s9.10.s12.13 (14 sixes)
(b) = s1.6.s9.10.14.15 (16 sixes)

==2) Flada Caters – Mark B Davies – May 2004==
This article is meant to focus on compositions more than methods, though it’s the method that is the star of the show here.

Flada: 3.1.3.1.3.569.1.569.1.5.9.145.9.145.7.9.7.9.7 = 234567891

The principle - devised by Tom Hinton - combines cyclic leadheads with rotational symmetry to great effect. It was one of a string of great cyclic methods rung near the beginning of the decade.

The division has 19 changes, leading to the interesting consequence that adjacent divisions are rung on opposite strokes.

The method is cleverly structured to include reverse runs round the half-division. A cyclic method can’t have “normal” palindromic symmetry (at least, not without being started away from the symmetry point), but can make use of either rotational (eg Anglia Cyclic) or Glide (eg Double Resurrection) symmetry.

Indeed, somewhat strangely Flada almost resembles a glide-symmetric cyclic method (which automatically includes the property of reverse runs round the half-lead).

The composition itself is functional, even slightly disappointing in that I don’t think it really maximally exploits the generous opportunities the method provides. It keeps the back bells fixed, missing out on the big reverse-run courses, as well as the tittums / queens transition:

5130 Flada Caters

123456 1 2 4 5 9
-----------------
341256 s -
541326 - s 2
145236 - -
415236 s
142536 s s
241356 - 4 -
-----------------
124563 - s s s
415263 s s s
542163 s s s
521436 s s s
245163 s -
524136 s s s
543216 - 4
-----------------
325416 s -
235416 s
235461 s
324561 s s
325461 s
234516 s s s
432156 - -
234165 s s s -
321456 s s s
123456 s s -
-----------------

That said, there’s fantastic scope for further examples.

==3) The emergence of the little bell runs… - Mark Eccleston, David Hull et al. – various==

As mentioned in the introduction of this article, the welcome shift towards little bell music in Stedman and Grandsire continues.

No one composition jumps out to my mind as the definitive example of a “composition of the decade” – the cyclic sections in the 2008 composition below are meant to be a typical illustrative example:

5004 Stedman Caters
Mark R Eccleston

123456789
---------
123456798 s9.11-16 (16)
2413 s1.6.s8.s12.16 |
4321 s1.6.s8.s12.16 |
3142 s1.6.s8.s12.16 |
--------- |
123457698 s1.6.s8.s10.s12.16 |
2413 6.8.s10.16.18 |
4321 6.8.s10.16.18 |
3142 6.8.s10.16.18 |
--------- | A
123465789 1.2.3.5.12 (20) |
2413 6.s8.16 |
4321 6.s8.16 |
3142 6.s8.16 |
--------- |
123465879 6.s8.s12.16 |
2413 s4.s9.s14.18.19 (20) |
4321 s4.s9.s14.18.19 (20) |
---------
312987654 s3.s5.6.8.11.s13.15 (16)
3219 y
291876543 x (16)
2198 y
189765432 x (16)
1987 y
978654321 x (16)
9876 y
---------
123457689 s1.3.7-10.12 (12)
---------
132456798 2.4.7-9.11.s13.14 (14)
---------
423165879 A
---------
798123456 3.5.9-11.13.15-19 (20)
7891 z
819234567 x (16)
8912 z
921345678 x (16)
9123 z
132456789 x (16)
1234 z
---------

x = 6.8.s11.13.14
y = s3.s10.14.s17
z = s3.14
Start with rounds as the last row of a quick six
Contains all near misses; 24 each 56798s, 65789s, 56789s;
6 each 987654s, 876543s, 765432s, 654321s, 123456s, 234567s, 345678s, 456789s.

==4) The extent of Grandsire Caters – Philip Saddleton==
I’m cautious about including the example below, because extents of Grandsire Caters were first published in the 19th Century, I believe. Philip’s composition below seems very logical, though, and I think was first published in 2004 (no doubt he’ll tell me if this is not the case).

Philip described in his inimitable pared-down style how to generate this from first principles in a June 2006 message to this list:

''These are examples of systems of hunts, the basis of many extents. More generally:
* find a block where a subset of the bells occupy each possible combination of positions (WHWH)
* find a calling that does not disturb this subset, but cycles the remaining bells - this gives an equivalent block for a larger subset (WHWx3)
* repeat as necessary, with a calling that fixes one more bell at each step (WHWx3 sH)''

362880 Grandsire Caters

23456789 1 3 4
------------------
43628579 - - s | | |
63847259 - - s | | |
38765429 - - - | | |
87532649 - - - |A | |
57284369 - - s | | |
27456839 - - s | | |
47623589 - - s | | |
------------------ | |
67348259 - - s | |C |
37865429 - - s | | |
78532649 - - - | | |
85274369 - - - |B | |
52486739 - - - | | |E
42653879 - - s | | |
62347589 - - s | | |
------------------ | |
76234 2B | |
43625789 2A | |
------------------ |
63542 C |
------------------ |
57263489 A | |
63572 4B |D |
54263789 A | |
------------------ |
35426 2D |
------------------
25364 3C |F
42536 2D |
------------------
24356 2F
------------------
45326 E |
54236 2F |G
43256 E |
------------------
324 G
------------------
Repeat

==5) Spliced Caters (4/5m) – Don Morrison – first rung March 2008==
Perhaps indicating the paucity of source material to select from, I think this (and its sister 4m composition) are probably the only examples of spliced Caters produced in the decade. Even then, the novelty is a bit doubtful – I think Steve Coaker may have come up with something similar in the mid 1990s.

Anyway, whilst it’s hard to get genuinely excited about this – both the choice of methods, music, and method transitions – there is some interest here. It’s better than a kick in the teeth…

5,051 Spliced Caters (5m)
Erin
123456789 4 5 6
241397568 (a)
31942 - - |
41923 - 2 - |A
39124 - - |
23914 s - |
14923 A |B
41329 2B
Stedman
413297568 6 8 15 16
214365798 (b)
132465 s -
341265 s -
423165 s -
241365 s s - 3
432165 s -
314265 s -
123465 s - (+ a single at 19)
Double Norwich Court Bob
(123465978) 1 3 5 7
135462978 s s
42365 s 2*
24365 s -
34265 s
43265 s -
32465 s s
63425 s - s
Grandsire
63425978 1 2 3 4
56324 - - s
35624 - - -
43526 - - s
54326 - - -
35426 - - -
63524 - - s
36524879 - - -
43625 - - s
64325 - - -
46523 - - s s
Plain Bob
46523879 W M H
54362 - - 4
24365 - 2+
Round at handstroke eight leads after the final call.
(a) = s1.2.s4.5.6.s8 (8 sixes)
(b) = s1.3.5.6.s10.12.14.17
2* = s -;
4 = s - s -;
2+ = - s.
Bobs in Double Norwich are place notation 3 instead of 5 as the treble hunts from 2 to 1; singles are place notation 345 instead of 5 as the treble hunts from 2 to 1.

Note on the Double Norwich start: A Stedman single is called at the
very end of the Stedman block (this is indicated above as at 19 in the Stedman, though if Stedman were continuing to be rung after this it would be at 1 in the following course), taking effect during the change into Double Norwich, thus:
213647589 last six of Stedman
231465798
321647589
312465798
132647589 single called
123465798
214356798 start of Double Norwich
241537689
425136798
452317689
543271698
etc.
Contains 1,080 Stedman, 1,074 Erin, 1,008 Double Norwich Court Bob, 1,007 Plain Bob and 882 Grandsire
4 changes of method, atw

==See Also==
*[[Compositions of the Decade 1 - Introduction]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 2 - Doubles]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 3 - Minor]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 4 - Triples]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 5 - Major]]
[[Category: Composition Reviews]]

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 5 - Major

2009-12-11T22:28:19Z

Pje24:

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 6 - Caters

2009-12-11T22:27:23Z

Pje24:

__NOTOC__
===A Review by Philip Earis - continued===

It’s hard to know what to say about Caters. And whilst you could interpret that as I don’t know what I’m saying about Caters, there is some clear evidence suggesting that there isn’t in fact much new to say. The stage is really rather moribund in many regards. Whether a cause, an effect or both, it undoubtedly remains dominated by Stedman and Grandsire.

You just have to look at some of the key indicators of innovation:

* There hasn’t been a meaningful long length of Caters since March 1990.
* There have been only 7 new Caters methods rung in the past decade. 6 of these are non-descript simple plain methods. Only one is of note – the cyclic and rotationally symmetric principle Flada, rung in Oxford in 2004. Things like Differentials, hybrids and so on all seems to have passed Caters by completely.
* There has only really been one peal of spliced Caters in the past decade. And the emergence of spliced Caters and Royal has only gone to show it’s not easy to achieve a synergistic effect.
* There has been only one handbell peal in the past five years that wasn’t Stedman or Grandsire. And that was Plain Bob.

Indeed, looking at peals.co.uk we see that whilst the total number of peals of Caters seems to have gone up around 10% in the past decade, around 98% of 9-bell peals are either Stedman or Grandsire (with Plain Bob, Erin and Double Norwich making up nearly all the rest)

It almost seems like Caters has turned into a dead zone. It is the stage people ring for a safe peal score or when royal seems a bit tricky, rather than something to be pursued and developed in its own right. This is a great shame, because Caters has so many possibilities and potential.

===The case for the defence===
The likely defence against my argument of stagnation is that innovation, music, excitement and so on can be obtained within the framework of Grandsire or Stedman. Even leaving aside my personal views on the musical qualities and potential of Stedman (the Irish joke about the traveller seeking directions comes to mind), this seems a bit of a bogus response – you don’t find similar arguments at even-bell stages.

Grandsire Caters clearly has many advantages, but even simple but attractive related methods like Double Grandsire (1 peal in the past 25 years) don’t seem to be in the canon.

===Running away===
So what’s been going on in Stedman Caters compositions? Well, the vast majority of compositions still seem to be shuffling deck-chairs on the titanic. You can re-arrange courses of 56s, 65s, so-called “tittums” (3 consecutive bells coursing – I ask you!) until the cows come home, indeed John Hyden has, but the end result is still the same.

Perhaps I’m being unfair. Caters has not been completely immune from trends on other number. The rounds -> queens transition on 10 bells is glorious, especially in methods with coursing music, and has been exploited in elegant multi-part Caters compositions for the first time: a real highlight of the decade. There remains much more scope for related developments.

More generally, there have been very welcome moves towards more bespoke compositions, incorporating cyclic music, and so on. Indeed, on the positive side and for the first time in the centuries Stedman has been rung, the little bells haven’t been completely dropped from the musical equation. This must count as progress.

It’s perhaps a sign of how bad things were in the past that the footnote to Mark Davies’ 2003 composition of 5055 Stedman Caters (no. 2) says, “Believed to be the first performance of a little-bell composition in Stedman's principle”. Any increase of music has got to be a good thing.

===Call of the wild===
The problem is that Stedman disrupts the coursing order, meaning transitions between musical blocks tend to feel forced, and involve lots of bobs, and even when you get there the effect is fleeting anyway. “Chase the row” is the description I give to some of the complex multi-call compositions. Calls can really disrupt the rhythm of ringing. And whilst you can go 25 minutes in a peal of Surprise Maximus without a call, you’ll be lucky to go 25 seconds in many of the complex bespoke peals of Stedman.

The progress in Stedman compositions (with parallels in Grandsire) has come from various directions – David Hull, Mark Eccleston, Rob Lee, Mark Davies, and so on. But is still feels to me at times that people are trying to answer the wrong questions, with the wrong method as a tool.

Mark has been a bit of an evangelist for Caters compositions, especially Grandsire. He invented Flada Caters, and is fizzing with other ideas. In a December 2005 message to the theory list he talked about some of his creations, finishing: “About time some more of these were rung, and not just invented...” I couldn’t agree more.

==1) 54-part Erin Caters – Ander Holroyd – rung May 2003 / November 2004==

This is a fantastic composition in 54-part form, combining a cyclic nine-part structure with the rounds -> queens "magnificent six" transposition, ie:

1234567890 (rounds)
----------
1357924680 (queens)
1594837260 (reverse tittums)
1987654320 (reverse rounds)
1864297530 (reverse queens)
1627384950 (tittums)
1234567890 (rounds)

Erin is the ideal method here, as the regular, unbroken coursing means 5 plain sixes of the method takes you straight from rounds to a “backrounds” six, allowing the method to maximise the music whilst reducing the number of calls.

5022 Erin Caters
123456789
---------
516273849 a
891234567 5b
---------
9-part

a = 1s.6.9s.10.12s.14.15.16.17.18.20s.21.22 (23 sixes)
b = 1s.6s.9s.10.12s.13 (14 sixes)

The original composition was further developed to produce the badboy below:

5076 Erin Caters
123456789
---------
738495162 (a)
975318642 (b)
198765432 (b)
615948372 (b)
468135792 (b)
345678912 (b)
---------
9-part

(a) = s1.s6.s9.10.s12.13 (14 sixes)
(b) = s1.6.s9.10.14.15 (16 sixes)

==2) Flada Caters – Mark B Davies – May 2004==
This article is meant to focus on compositions more than methods, though it’s the method that is the star of the show here.

Flada: 3.1.3.1.3.569.1.569.1.5.9.145.9.145.7.9.7.9.7 = 234567891

The principle - devised by Tom Hinton - combines cyclic leadheads with rotational symmetry to great effect. It was one of a string of great cyclic methods rung near the beginning of the decade.

The division has 19 changes, leading to the interesting consequence that adjacent divisions are rung on opposite strokes.

The method is cleverly structured to include reverse runs round the half-division. A cyclic method can’t have “normal” palindromic symmetry (at least, not without being started away from the symmetry point), but can make use of either rotational (eg Anglia Cyclic) or Glide (eg Double Resurrection) symmetry.

Indeed, somewhat strangely Flada almost resembles a glide-symmetric cyclic method (which automatically includes the property of reverse runs round the half-lead).

The composition itself is functional, even slightly disappointing in that I don’t think it really maximally exploits the generous opportunities the method provides. It keeps the back bells fixed, missing out on the big reverse-run courses, as well as the tittums / queens transition:

5130 Flada Caters

123456 1 2 4 5 9
-----------------
341256 s -
541326 - s 2
145236 - -
415236 s
142536 s s
241356 - 4 -
-----------------
124563 - s s s
415263 s s s
542163 s s s
521436 s s s
245163 s -
524136 s s s
543216 - 4
-----------------
325416 s -
235416 s
235461 s
324561 s s
325461 s
234516 s s s
432156 - -
234165 s s s -
321456 s s s
123456 s s -
-----------------

That said, there’s fantastic scope for further examples.

==3) The emergence of the little bell runs… - Mark Eccleston, David Hull et al. – various==

As mentioned in the introduction of this article, the welcome shift towards little bell music in Stedman and Grandsire continues.

No one composition jumps out to my mind as the definitive example of a “composition of the decade” – the cyclic sections in the 2008 composition below are meant to be a typical illustrative example:

5004 Stedman Caters
Mark R Eccleston

123456789
---------
123456798 s9.11-16 (16)
2413 s1.6.s8.s12.16 |
4321 s1.6.s8.s12.16 |
3142 s1.6.s8.s12.16 |
--------- |
123457698 s1.6.s8.s10.s12.16 |
2413 6.8.s10.16.18 |
4321 6.8.s10.16.18 |
3142 6.8.s10.16.18 |
--------- | A
123465789 1.2.3.5.12 (20) |
2413 6.s8.16 |
4321 6.s8.16 |
3142 6.s8.16 |
--------- |
123465879 6.s8.s12.16 |
2413 s4.s9.s14.18.19 (20) |
4321 s4.s9.s14.18.19 (20) |
---------
312987654 s3.s5.6.8.11.s13.15 (16)
3219 y
291876543 x (16)
2198 y
189765432 x (16)
1987 y
978654321 x (16)
9876 y
---------
123457689 s1.3.7-10.12 (12)
---------
132456798 2.4.7-9.11.s13.14 (14)
---------
423165879 A
---------
798123456 3.5.9-11.13.15-19 (20)
7891 z
819234567 x (16)
8912 z
921345678 x (16)
9123 z
132456789 x (16)
1234 z
---------

x = 6.8.s11.13.14
y = s3.s10.14.s17
z = s3.14
Start with rounds as the last row of a quick six
Contains all near misses; 24 each 56798s, 65789s, 56789s;
6 each 987654s, 876543s, 765432s, 654321s, 123456s, 234567s, 345678s, 456789s.

==4) The extent of Grandsire Caters – Philip Saddleton==
I’m cautious about including the example below, because extents of Grandsire Caters were first published in the 19th Century, I believe. Philip’s composition below seems very logical, though, and I think was first published in 2004 (no doubt he’ll tell me if this is not the case).

Philip described in his inimitable pared-down style how to generate this from first principles in a June 2006 message to this list:

''These are examples of systems of hunts, the basis of many extents. More generally:
* find a block where a subset of the bells occupy each possible combination of positions (WHWH)
* find a calling that does not disturb this subset, but cycles the remaining bells - this gives an equivalent block for a larger subset (WHWx3)
* repeat as necessary, with a calling that fixes one more bell at each step (WHWx3 sH)''

362880 Grandsire Caters

23456789 1 3 4
------------------
43628579 - - s | | |
63847259 - - s | | |
38765429 - - - | | |
87532649 - - - |A | |
57284369 - - s | | |
27456839 - - s | | |
47623589 - - s | | |
------------------ | |
67348259 - - s | |C |
37865429 - - s | | |
78532649 - - - | | |
85274369 - - - |B | |
52486739 - - - | | |E
42653879 - - s | | |
62347589 - - s | | |
------------------ | |
76234 2B | |
43625789 2A | |
------------------ |
63542 C |
------------------ |
57263489 A | |
63572 4B |D |
54263789 A | |
------------------ |
35426 2D |
------------------
25364 3C |F
42536 2D |
------------------
24356 2F
------------------
45326 E |
54236 2F |G
43256 E |
------------------
324 G
------------------
Repeat

==5) Spliced Caters (4/5m) – Don Morrison – first rung March 2008==
Perhaps indicating the paucity of source material to select from, I think this (and its sister 4m composition) are probably the only examples of spliced Caters produced in the decade. Even then, the novelty is a bit doubtful – I think Steve Coaker may have come up with something similar in the mid 1990s.

Anyway, whilst it’s hard to get genuinely excited about this – both the choice of methods, music, and method transitions – there is some interest here. It’s better than a kick in the teeth…

5,051 Spliced Caters (5m)
Erin
123456789 4 5 6
241397568 (a)
31942 - - |
41923 - 2 - |A
39124 - - |
23914 s - |
14923 A |B
41329 2B
Stedman
413297568 6 8 15 16
214365798 (b)
132465 s -
341265 s -
423165 s -
241365 s s - 3
432165 s -
314265 s -
123465 s - (+ a single at 19)
Double Norwich Court Bob
(123465978) 1 3 5 7
135462978 s s
42365 s 2*
24365 s -
34265 s
43265 s -
32465 s s
63425 s - s
Grandsire
63425978 1 2 3 4
56324 - - s
35624 - - -
43526 - - s
54326 - - -
35426 - - -
63524 - - s
36524879 - - -
43625 - - s
64325 - - -
46523 - - s s
Plain Bob
46523879 W M H
54362 - - 4
24365 - 2+
Round at handstroke eight leads after the final call.
(a) = s1.2.s4.5.6.s8 (8 sixes)
(b) = s1.3.5.6.s10.12.14.17
2* = s -;
4 = s - s -;
2+ = - s.
Bobs in Double Norwich are place notation 3 instead of 5 as the treble hunts from 2 to 1; singles are place notation 345 instead of 5 as the treble hunts from 2 to 1.

Note on the Double Norwich start: A Stedman single is called at the
very end of the Stedman block (this is indicated above as at 19 in the Stedman, though if Stedman were continuing to be rung after this it would be at 1 in the following course), taking effect during the change into Double Norwich, thus:
213647589 last six of Stedman
231465798
321647589
312465798
132647589 single called
123465798
214356798 start of Double Norwich
241537689
425136798
452317689
543271698
etc.
Contains 1,080 Stedman, 1,074 Erin, 1,008 Double Norwich Court Bob, 1,007 Plain Bob and 882 Grandsire
4 changes of method, atw

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 6 - Caters

2009-12-11T14:49:17Z

Pje24:

__NOTOC__
===A Review by Philip Earis - continued===

It’s hard to know what to say about Caters. And whilst you could interpret that as I don’t know what I’m saying about Caters, there is some clear evidence suggesting that there isn’t in fact much new to say. The stage is really rather moribund in many regards. Whether a cause, an effect or both, it undoubtedly remains dominated by Stedman and Grandsire.

You just have to look at some of the key indicators of innovation:

* There hasn’t been a meaningful long length of Caters since March 1990.
* There have been only 7 new Caters methods rung in the past decade. 6 of these are non-descript simple plain methods. Only one is of note – the cyclic and rotationally symmetric principle Flada, rung in Oxford in 2004. Things like Differentials, hybrids and so on all seems to have passed Caters by completely.
* There has only really been one peal of spliced Caters in the past decade. And the emergence of spliced Caters and Royal has only gone to show it’s not easy to achieve a synergistic effect.
* There has been only one handbell peal in the past five years that wasn’t Stedman or Grandsire. And that was Plain Bob.

Indeed, looking at peals.co.uk we see that whilst the total number of peals of Caters seems to have gone up around 10% in the past decade, around 98% of 9-bell peals are either Stedman or Grandsire (with Plain Bob, Erin and Double Norwich making up nearly all the rest)

It almost seems like Caters has turned into a dead zone. It is the stage people ring for a safe peal score or when royal seems a bit tricky, rather than something to be pursued and developed in its own right. This is a great shame, because Caters has so many possibilities and potential.

===The case for the defence===
The likely defence against my argument of stagnation is that innovation, music, excitement and so on can be obtained within the framework of Grandsire or Stedman. Even leaving aside my personal views on the musical qualities and potential of Stedman (the Irish joke about the traveller seeking directions comes to mind), this seems a bit of a bogus response – you don’t find similar arguments at even-bell stages.

Grandsire Caters clearly has many advantages, but even simple but attractive related methods like Double Grandsire (1 peal in the past 25 years) don’t seem to be in the canon.

===Running away===
So what’s been going on in Stedman Caters compositions? Well, the vast majority of compositions still seem to be shuffling deck-chairs on the titanic. You can re-arrange courses of 56s, 65s, so-called “tittums” (3 consecutive bells coursing – I ask you!) until the cows come home, indeed John Hyden has, but the end result is still the same.

Perhaps I’m being unfair. Caters has not been completely immune from trends on other number. The rounds -> queens transition on 10 bells is glorious, especially in methods with coursing music, and has been exploited in elegant multi-part Caters compositions for the first time: a real highlight of the decade. There remains much more scope for related developments.

More generally, there have been very welcome moves towards more bespoke compositions, incorporating cyclic music, and so on. Indeed, on the positive side and for the first time in the centuries Stedman has been rung, the little bells haven’t been completely dropped from the musical equation. This must count as progress.

It’s perhaps a sign of how bad things were in the past that the footnote to Mark Davies’ 2003 composition of 5055 Stedman Caters (no. 2) says, “Believed to be the first performance of a little-bell composition in Stedman's principle”. Any increase of music has got to be a good thing.

===Call of the wild===
The problem is that Stedman disrupts the coursing order, meaning transitions between musical blocks tend to feel forced, and involve lots of bobs, and even when you get there the effect is fleeting anyway. “Chase the row” is the description I give to some of the complex multi-call compositions. Calls can really disrupt the rhythm of ringing. And whilst you can go 25 minutes in a peal of Surprise Maximus without a call, you’ll be lucky to go 25 seconds in many of the complex bespoke peals of Stedman.

The progress in Stedman compositions (with parallels in Grandsire) has come from various directions – David Hull, Mark Eccleston, Rob Lee, Mark Davies, and so on. But is still feels to me at times that people are trying to answer the wrong questions, with the wrong method as a tool.

Mark has been a bit of an evangelist for Caters compositions, especially Grandsire. He invented Flada Caters, and is fizzing with other ideas. In a December 2005 message to the theory list he talked about some of his creations, finishing: “About time some more of these were rung, and not just invented...” I couldn’t agree more.

==1) 54-part Erin Caters – Ander Holroyd – rung May 2003 / November 2004==

This is a fantastic composition in 54-part form, combining a cyclic nine-part structure with the rounds -> queens "magnificent six" transposition, ie:

1234567890 (rounds)
----------
1357924680 (queens)
1594837260 (reverse tittums)
1987654320 (reverse rounds)
1864297530 (reverse queens)
1627384950 (tittums)
1234567890 (rounds)

Erin is the ideal method here, as the regular, unbroken coursing means 5 plain sixes of the method takes you straight from rounds to a “backrounds” six, allowing the method to maximise the music whilst reducing the number of calls.

5022 Erin Caters
123456789
---------
516273849 a
891234567 5b
---------
9-part

a = 1s.6.9s.10.12s.14.15.16.17.18.20s.21.22 (23 sixes)
b = 1s.6s.9s.10.12s.13 (14 sixes)

The original composition was further developed to produce the badboy below:

5076 Erin Caters
123456789
---------
738495162 (a)
975318642 (b)
198765432 (b)
615948372 (b)
468135792 (b)
345678912 (b)
---------
9-part

(a) = s1.s6.s9.10.s12.13 (14 sixes)
(b) = s1.6.s9.10.14.15 (16 sixes)

==2) Flada Caters – Mark B Davies – May 2004==
This article is meant to focus on compositions more than methods, though it’s the method that is the star of the show here.

Flada: 3.1.3.1.3.569.1.569.1.5.9.145.9.145.7.9.7.9.7 = 234567891

The principle combines cyclic leadheads with rotational symmetry to great effect. It was one of a string of great cyclic methods rung near the beginning of the decade.

The division has 19 changes, leading to the interesting consequence that adjacent divisions are rung on opposite strokes.

The method is cleverly structured to include reverse runs round the half-division. A cyclic method can’t have “normal” palindromic symmetry (at least, not without being started away from the symmetry point), but can make use of either rotational (eg Anglia Cyclic) or Glide (eg Double Resurrection) symmetry.

Indeed, somewhat strangely Flada almost resembles a glide-symmetric cyclic method (which automatically includes the property of reverse runs round the half-lead).

From memory the composition itself was functional, even slightly disappointing in that I don’t think it really maximally exploited the generous opportunities the method provides. If I recall correctly (and I hope MBD will put me right), it missed out the big reverse-run courses, as well as the tittums / queens transition.

That said, there’s fantastic scope for further examples.

==3) The emergence of the little bell runs… - Mark Eccleston, David Hull et al. – various==

As mentioned in the introduction of this article, the welcome shift towards little bell music in Stedman and Grandsire continues.

No one composition jumps out to my mind as the definitive example of a “composition of the decade” – the cyclic sections in the 2008 composition below are meant to be a typical illustrative example:

5004 Stedman Caters
Mark R Eccleston

123456789
---------
123456798 s9.11-16 (16)
2413 s1.6.s8.s12.16 |
4321 s1.6.s8.s12.16 |
3142 s1.6.s8.s12.16 |
--------- |
123457698 s1.6.s8.s10.s12.16 |
2413 6.8.s10.16.18 |
4321 6.8.s10.16.18 |
3142 6.8.s10.16.18 |
--------- | A
123465789 1.2.3.5.12 (20) |
2413 6.s8.16 |
4321 6.s8.16 |
3142 6.s8.16 |
--------- |
123465879 6.s8.s12.16 |
2413 s4.s9.s14.18.19 (20) |
4321 s4.s9.s14.18.19 (20) |
---------
312987654 s3.s5.6.8.11.s13.15 (16)
3219 y
291876543 x (16)
2198 y
189765432 x (16)
1987 y
978654321 x (16)
9876 y
---------
123457689 s1.3.7-10.12 (12)
---------
132456798 2.4.7-9.11.s13.14 (14)
---------
423165879 A
---------
798123456 3.5.9-11.13.15-19 (20)
7891 z
819234567 x (16)
8912 z
921345678 x (16)
9123 z
132456789 x (16)
1234 z
---------

x = 6.8.s11.13.14
y = s3.s10.14.s17
z = s3.14
Start with rounds as the last row of a quick six
Contains all near misses; 24 each 56798s, 65789s, 56789s;
6 each 987654s, 876543s, 765432s, 654321s, 123456s, 234567s, 345678s, 456789s.

==4) The extent of Grandsire Caters – Philip Saddleton==
I’m cautious about including the example below, because extents of Grandsire Caters were first published in the 19th Century, I believe. Philip’s composition below seems very logical, though, and I think was first published in 2004 (no doubt he’ll tell me if this is not the case).

Philip described in his inimitable pared-down style how to generate this from first principles in a June 2006 message to this list:

''These are examples of systems of hunts, the basis of many extents. More generally:
* find a block where a subset of the bells occupy each possible combination of positions (WHWH)
* find a calling that does not disturb this subset, but cycles the remaining bells - this gives an equivalent block for a larger subset (WHWx3)
* repeat as necessary, with a calling that fixes one more bell at each step (WHWx3 sH)''

362880 Grandsire Caters

23456789 1 3 4
------------------
43628579 - - s | | |
63847259 - - s | | |
38765429 - - - | | |
87532649 - - - |A | |
57284369 - - s | | |
27456839 - - s | | |
47623589 - - s | | |
------------------ | |
67348259 - - s | |C |
37865429 - - s | | |
78532649 - - - | | |
85274369 - - - |B | |
52486739 - - - | | |E
42653879 - - s | | |
62347589 - - s | | |
------------------ | |
76234 2B | |
43625789 2A | |
------------------ |
63542 C |
------------------ |
57263489 A | |
63572 4B |D |
54263789 A | |
------------------ |
35426 2D |
------------------
25364 3C |F
42536 2D |
------------------
24356 2F
------------------
45326 E |
54236 2F |G
43256 E |
------------------
324 G
------------------
Repeat

==5) Spliced Caters (4/5m) – Don Morrison – first rung March 2008==
Perhaps indicating the paucity of source material to select from, I think this (and its sister 4m composition) are probably the only examples of spliced Caters produced in the decade. Even then, the novelty is a bit doubtful – I think Steve Coaker may have come up with something similar in the mid 1990s.

Anyway, whilst it’s hard to get genuinely excited about this – both the choice of methods, music, and method transitions – there is some interest here. It’s better than a kick in the teeth…

5,051 Spliced Caters (5m)
Erin
123456789 4 5 6
241397568 (a)
31942 - - |
41923 - 2 - |A
39124 - - |
23914 s - |
14923 A |B
41329 2B
Stedman
413297568 6 8 15 16
214365798 (b)
132465 s -
341265 s -
423165 s -
241365 s s - 3
432165 s -
314265 s -
123465 s - (+ a single at 19)
Double Norwich Court Bob
(123465978) 1 3 5 7
135462978 s s
42365 s 2*
24365 s -
34265 s
43265 s -
32465 s s
63425 s - s
Grandsire
63425978 1 2 3 4
56324 - - s
35624 - - -
43526 - - s
54326 - - -
35426 - - -
63524 - - s
36524879 - - -
43625 - - s
64325 - - -
46523 - - s s
Plain Bob
46523879 W M H
54362 - - 4
24365 - 2+
Round at handstroke eight leads after the final call.
(a) = s1.2.s4.5.6.s8 (8 sixes)
(b) = s1.3.5.6.s10.12.14.17
2* = s -;
4 = s - s -;
2+ = - s.
Bobs in Double Norwich are place notation 3 instead of 5 as the treble hunts from 2 to 1; singles are place notation 345 instead of 5 as the treble hunts from 2 to 1.

Note on the Double Norwich start: A Stedman single is called at the
very end of the Stedman block (this is indicated above as at 19 in the Stedman, though if Stedman were continuing to be rung after this it would be at 1 in the following course), taking effect during the change into Double Norwich, thus:
213647589 last six of Stedman
231465798
321647589
312465798
132647589 single called
123465798
214356798 start of Double Norwich
241537689
425136798
452317689
543271698
etc.
Contains 1,080 Stedman, 1,074 Erin, 1,008 Double Norwich Court Bob, 1,007 Plain Bob and 882 Grandsire
4 changes of method, atw

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 6 - Caters

2009-12-11T14:45:37Z

Pje24: Created page with '__NOTOC__ ===A Review by Philip Earis - continued=== It’s hard to know what to say about Caters. And whilst you could interpret that as I don’t know what I’m saying about …'

__NOTOC__
===A Review by Philip Earis - continued===

It’s hard to know what to say about Caters. And whilst you could interpret that as I don’t know what I’m saying about Caters, there is some clear evidence suggesting that there isn’t in fact much new to say. The stage is really rather moribund in many regards. Whether a cause, an effect or both, it undoubtedly remains dominated by Stedman and Grandsire.

You just have to look at some of the key indicators of innovation:

* There hasn’t been a meaningful long length of Caters since March 1990.
* There have been only 7 new Caters methods rung in the past decade. 6 of these are non-descript simple plain methods. Only one is of note – the cyclic and rotationally symmetric principle Flada, rung in Oxford in 2004. Things like Differentials, hybrids and so on all seems to have passed Caters by completely.
* There has only really been one peal of spliced Caters in the past decade. And the emergence of spliced Caters and Royal has only gone to show it’s not easy to achieve a synergistic effect.
* There has been only one handbell peal in the past five years that wasn’t Stedman or Grandsire. And that was Plain Bob.

Indeed, looking at peals.co.uk we see that whilst the total number of peals of Caters seems to have gone up around 10% in the past decade, around 98% of 9-bell peals are either Stedman or Grandsire (with Plain Bob, Erin and Double Norwich making up nearly all the rest)

It almost seems like Caters has turned into a dead zone. It is the stage people ring for a safe peal score or when royal seems a bit tricky, rather than something to be pursued and developed in its own right. This is a great shame, because Caters has so many possibilities and potential.

===The case for the defence===
The likely defence against my argument of stagnation is that innovation, music, excitement and so on can be obtained within the framework of Grandsire or Stedman. Even leaving aside my personal views on the musical qualities and potential of Stedman (the Irish joke about the traveller seeking directions comes to mind), this seems a bit of a bogus response – you don’t find similar arguments at even-bell stages.

Grandsire Caters clearly has many advantages, but even simple but attractive related methods like Double Grandsire (1 peal in the past 25 years) don’t seem to be in the canon.

===Running away===
So what’s been going on in Stedman Caters compositions? Well, the vast majority of compositions still seem to be shuffling deck-chairs on the titanic. You can re-arrange courses of 56s, 65s, so-called “tittums” (3 consecutive bells coursing – I ask you!) until the cows come home, indeed John Hyden has, but the end result is still the same.

Perhaps I’m being unfair. Caters has not been completely immune from trends on other number. The rounds -> queens transition on 10 bells is glorious, especially in methods with coursing music, and has been exploited in elegant multi-part Caters compositions for the first time: a real highlight of the decade. There remains much more scope for related developments.

More generally, there have been very welcome moves towards more bespoke compositions, incorporating cyclic music, and so on. Indeed, on the positive side and for the first time in the centuries Stedman has been rung, the little bells haven’t been completely dropped from the musical equation. This must count as progress.

It’s perhaps a sign of how bad things were in the past that the footnote to Mark Davies’ 2003 composition of 5055 Stedman Caters (no. 2) says, “Believed to be the first performance of a little-bell composition in Stedman's principle”. Any increase of music has got to be a good thing.

===Call of the wild===
The problem is that Stedman disrupts the coursing order, meaning transitions between musical blocks tend to feel forced, and involve lots of bobs, and even when you get there the effect is fleeting anyway. “Chase the row” is the description I give to some of the complex multi-call compositions. Calls can really disrupt the rhythm of ringing. And whilst you can go 25 minutes in a peal of Surprise Maximus without a call, you’ll be lucky to go 25 seconds in many of the complex bespoke peals of Stedman.

The progress in Stedman compositions (with parallels in Grandsire) has come from various directions – David Hull, Mark Eccleston, Rob Lee, Mark Davies, and so on. But is still feels to me at times that people are trying to answer the wrong questions, with the wrong method as a tool.

Mark has been a bit of an evangelist for Caters compositions, especially Grandsire. He invented Flada Caters, and is fizzing with other ideas. In a December 2005 message to the theory list he talked about some of his creations, finishing: “About time some more of these were rung, and not just invented...” I couldn’t agree more.

==1) 54-part Erin Caters – Ander Holroyd – rung May 2003 / November 2004==

This is a fantastic composition in 54-part form, combining a cyclic nine-part structure with the rounds -> queens "magnificent six" transposition, ie:

1234567890 (rounds)
----------
1357924680 (queens)
1594837260 (reverse tittums)
1987654320 (reverse rounds)
1864297530 (reverse queens)
1627384950 (tittums)
1234567890 (rounds)

Erin is the ideal method here, as the regular, unbroken coursing means 5 plain sixes of the method takes you straight from rounds to a “backrounds” six, allowing the method to maximise the music whilst reducing the number of calls.

5022 Erin Caters
123456789
---------
516273849 a
891234567 5b
---------
9-part

a = 1s.6.9s.10.12s.14.15.16.17.18.20s.21.22 (23 sixes)
b = 1s.6s.9s.10.12s.13 (14 sixes)

The original composition was further developed to produce the badboy below:

5076 Erin Caters
123456789
---------
738495162 (a)
975318642 (b)
198765432 (b)
615948372 (b)
468135792 (b)
345678912 (b)
---------
9-part

(a) = s1.s6.s9.10.s12.13 (14 sixes)
(b) = s1.6.s9.10.14.15 (16 sixes)

==2) Flada Caters – Mark B Davies – May 2004==
This article is meant to focus on compositions more than methods, though it’s the method that is the star of the show here.

Flada: 3.1.3.1.3.569.1.569.1.5.9.145.9.145.7.9.7.9.7 = 234567891

The principle combines cyclic leadheads with rotational symmetry to great effect. It was one of a string of great cyclic methods rung near the beginning of the decade.

The division has 19 changes, leading to the interesting consequence that adjacent divisions are rung on opposite strokes.

The method is cleverly structured to include reverse runs round the half-division. A cyclic method can’t have “normal” palindromic symmetry (at least, not without being started away from the symmetry point), but can make use of either rotational (eg Anglia Cyclic) or Glide (eg Double Resurrection) symmetry.

Indeed, somewhat strangely Flada almost resembles a glide-symmetric cyclic method (which automatically includes the property of reverse runs round the half-lead).

From memory the composition itself was functional, even slightly disappointing in that I don’t think it really maximally exploited the generous opportunities the method provides. If I recall correctly (and I hope MBD will put me right), it missed out the big reverse-run courses, as well as the tittums / queens transition.

That said, there’s fantastic scope for further examples.

==3) The emergence of the little bell runs… - Mark Eccleston, David Hull et al. – various==

As mentioned in the introduction of this article, the welcome shift towards little bell music in Stedman and Grandsire continues.

No one composition jumps out to my mind as the definitive example of a “composition of the decade” – the cyclic sections in the 2008 composition below are meant to be a typical illustrative example:

5004 Stedman Caters
Mark R Eccleston

123456789

---------

123456798 s9.11-16 (16)
2413 s1.6.s8.s12.16 |
4321 s1.6.s8.s12.16 |
3142 s1.6.s8.s12.16 |
--------- |
123457698 s1.6.s8.s10.s12.16 |
2413 6.8.s10.16.18 |
4321 6.8.s10.16.18 |
3142 6.8.s10.16.18 |
--------- | A
123465789 1.2.3.5.12 (20) |
2413 6.s8.16 |
4321 6.s8.16 |
3142 6.s8.16 |
--------- |
123465879 6.s8.s12.16 |
2413 s4.s9.s14.18.19 (20) |
4321 s4.s9.s14.18.19 (20) |
---------
312987654 s3.s5.6.8.11.s13.15 (16)
3219 y
291876543 x (16)
2198 y
189765432 x (16)
1987 y
978654321 x (16)
9876 y
---------
123457689 s1.3.7-10.12 (12)
---------
132456798 2.4.7-9.11.s13.14 (14)
---------
423165879 A
---------
798123456 3.5.9-11.13.15-19 (20)
7891 z
819234567 x (16)
8912 z
921345678 x (16)
9123 z
132456789 x (16)
1234 z
---------

x = 6.8.s11.13.14
y = s3.s10.14.s17
z = s3.14
Start with rounds as the last row of a quick six
Contains all near misses; 24 each 56798s, 65789s, 56789s;
6 each 987654s, 876543s, 765432s, 654321s, 123456s, 234567s, 345678s, 456789s.

==4) The extent of Grandsire Caters – Philip Saddleton==
I’m cautious about including the example below, because extents of Grandsire Caters were first published in the 19th Century, I believe. Philip’s composition below seems very logical, though, and I think was first published in 2004 (no doubt he’ll tell me if this is not the case).

Philip described in his inimitable pared-down style how to generate this from first principles in a June 2006 message to this list:

“These are examples of systems of hunts, the basis of many extents. More generally:

- find a block where a subset of the bells occupy each possible combination of positions (WHWH)

- find a calling that does not disturb this subset, but cycles the remaining bells - this gives an equivalent block for a larger subset (WHWx3)

- repeat as necessary, with a calling that fixes one more bell at each step (WHWx3 sH)”

362880 Grandsire Caters

23456789 1 3 4
------------------
43628579 - - s | | |
63847259 - - s | | |
38765429 - - - | | |
87532649 - - - |A | |
57284369 - - s | | |
27456839 - - s | | |
47623589 - - s | | |
------------------ | |
67348259 - - s | |C |
37865429 - - s | | |
78532649 - - - | | |
85274369 - - - |B | |
52486739 - - - | | |E
42653879 - - s | | |
62347589 - - s | | |
------------------ | |
76234 2B | |
43625789 2A | |
------------------ |
63542 C |
------------------ |
57263489 A | |
63572 4B |D |
54263789 A | |
------------------ |
35426 2D |
------------------
25364 3C |F
42536 2D |
------------------
24356 2F
------------------
45326 E |
54236 2F |G
43256 E |
------------------
324 G
------------------
Repeat

==5) Spliced Caters (4/5m) – Don Morrison – first rung March 2008==
Perhaps indicating the paucity of source material to select from, I think this (and its sister 4m composition) are probably the only examples of spliced Caters produced in the decade. Even then, the novelty is a bit doubtful – I think Steve Coaker may have come up with something similar in the mid 1990s.

Anyway, whilst it’s hard to get genuinely excited about this – both the choice of methods, music, and method transitions – there is some interest here. It’s better than a kick in the teeth…

5,051 Spliced Caters (5m)
Erin
123456789 4 5 6
241397568 (a)
31942 - - |
41923 - 2 - |A
39124 - - |
23914 s - |
14923 A |B
41329 2B
Stedman
413297568 6 8 15 16
214365798 (b)
132465 s -
341265 s -
423165 s -
241365 s s - 3
432165 s -
314265 s -
123465 s - (+ a single at 19)
Double Norwich Court Bob
(123465978) 1 3 5 7
135462978 s s
42365 s 2*
24365 s -
34265 s
43265 s -
32465 s s
63425 s - s
Grandsire
63425978 1 2 3 4
56324 - - s
35624 - - -
43526 - - s
54326 - - -
35426 - - -
63524 - - s
36524879 - - -
43625 - - s
64325 - - -
46523 - - s s
Plain Bob
46523879 W M H
54362 - - 4
24365 - 2+
Round at handstroke eight leads after the final call.
(a) = s1.2.s4.5.6.s8 (8 sixes)
(b) = s1.3.5.6.s10.12.14.17
2* = s -;
4 = s - s -;
2+ = - s.
Bobs in Double Norwich are place notation 3 instead of 5 as the treble hunts from 2 to 1; singles are place notation 345 instead of 5 as the treble hunts from 2 to 1.

Note on the Double Norwich start: A Stedman single is called at the
very end of the Stedman block (this is indicated above as at 19 in the Stedman, though if Stedman were continuing to be rung after this it would be at 1 in the following course), taking effect during the change into Double Norwich, thus:
213647589 last six of Stedman
231465798
321647589
312465798
132647589 single called
123465798
214356798 start of Double Norwich
241537689
425136798
452317689
543271698
etc.
Contains 1,080 Stedman, 1,074 Erin, 1,008 Double Norwich Court Bob, 1,007 Plain Bob and 882 Grandsire, with 4 changes of method, and is all the work.

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 1 - Introduction

2009-12-11T14:37:57Z

Pje24:

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 3 - Minor

2009-12-10T13:39:20Z

Pje24:

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 3 - Minor

2009-12-10T13:38:07Z

Pje24: /* See Also */

__NOTOC__
===A Review by Philip Earis - continued===
Six bell ringing has continued to flourish over the past ten years. It has been a marvellous decade.

The tendency has been towards multi-method peals, and compositions have been longer, leaner and neater than ever before. The liberalisation of the so-called “decisions” - removing the straightjacket of peals needing to consist of mutually true extents – has continued to be a driving force for progress in spliced minor. Building on compositional breakthroughs in the previous decade (where ringing the 41 “regular” surprise minor methods in a peal became considerably easier), the splices between different methods have now been exploited much more fully, and expanded beyond just surprise methods. A potent combination of formidable composers, principally Richard Smith and John Warboys, being chased (and sometimes directed) by a hungry pack of dogs eager to ring as soon as possible the slabs of compositional meat they tossed down, has created a perfect creative storm.

Michael Foulds published his series of books on spliced treble-dodging minor in 2002, and these have acted as a catalyst for some of the compositional advances also. In parallel to this, an entirely new form of splicing minor – “magic blocks” - sprang up at the beginning of the decade, facilitating the simultaneous splicing of over- and under- works together much more efficiently. Consequently, the boundaries of minor ringing have been pushed back, and previously where ringing the 41-spliced brought some closure, now all 147-regular treble-dodging minor (or even all 729 grids) is the new baseline.

Whilst the majority of effort has been directed towards treble-dodging minor methods, there remains much that is going on. Innovative new extents on other plans have resulted, as we shall see. My pick of the bunch are below. As before, I have concentrated primarily (but not exclusively) on new compositions rather than methods.

==1) 147-spliced treble-dodging minor (atw) Richard Smith / John Warboys – April/May 2004 (non-atw) – John Warboys – First rung July 2005==

Richard and John both composed peals of spliced treble-dodging minor in all 147 regular treble-dodging minor methods 2004. The compositions were on a whole-course plan, to achieve all-the-work. John devised a 33-extent version in April 2004, but before this was attempted he tweaked it to produce a 30-extent (ie 21600 change) composition that was rung in May 2004: http://website.lineone.net/~jswcomps/. Richard simultaneously used all the tools in his considerable toolkit to produce a shorter, 29-extent composition that was rung shortly afterwards.

John subsequently produced a “tour-de-force” 10-extent composition (obviously not atw) of the 147 in 2005: http://website.lineone.net/~jswcomps/147_7200.pdf. This was rung first in tower, on 24th July. The band was kept somewhat in the dark about the structure of the composition, as the composer was fearful it might leak out and be rung in hand first. He probably had good reason – following its publication on 25th July, Andrew Tibbetts called a handbell peal of it the very next day.

==2) Magic blocks – Philip Saddleton / Richard Smith / Andrew Tibbetts / David Pipe – December 2003 onwards==

Philip Saddleton conceived the idea for “magic blocks” of minor, whereby the established concept of a 6-lead spliced is extended to every working bell, and for both over- and under- works, to produce extents without calls. Richard Smith explains more fully here: http://www.bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2004-August/000003.html

Philip actually communicated the idea by email to Roger Bailey in December 2000, but Roger’s lack of response left the idea un-tapped until I learnt of it following a chance exchange with Philip a few years later. The idea quickly took off in Cambridge, and the first of many minor peals consisting of magic blocks was rung in December 2003.

The concept was developed to fit in more grids, with contributions from Richard Smith, Andrew Tibbetts and David Pipe. A natural conclusion was fitting all 729 “regular” grids into as short a peal as possible – this was done in 19440 changes in January 2005, followed later that year by a 1053-method peal (incorporating methods with -1256- when the treble dodges in 3-4).

Perhaps the zenith of method-packing efficiency came in August 2004, when Richard Smith produced a 7-extent composition of all 324 grid combinations with -12- when the treble dodges in 3-4. The composition was subsequently rung in January 2007, and can be seen at: http://www.cantabgold.net/users/pje24/324x2x.pdf (there is a typo in the notation for Cambridge)

==3) 3600 Spliced S. Minor (41 methods) – John Warboys – February 2005==

Some ringers regrettably need shorter lengths to tempt them to jump into the minor pool. Even twenty years ago, no-one had even got the standard 41 surprise minor methods into a ten-extent composition, and yet John Warboys has now very neatly managed to fit everything into just 5 extents.

23456 Ke We Li Li
- 23564 Lo
- 45236 Lo We Lo We
- 45362 Li Lo Ke We Co
- 34562 We
- 25346 We Lo Lo We
- 25463 Cu Cu Cu Cu Cu
- 42563 We
- 35426 Ke Lo Co Co
- 35264 Lo
23456 Ct Mo
- 42356 Mo Ct
- 34256 Ch Ch
- 45623 Mu Nb Sa Nb Mu
- 64523 Nw Ak Ak
- 35642 Ch Ch Mu Cl Mu
- 63542 Ak Ak Nw
- 25634 Nb Ch Cl Nb Sa
- 62534 Wh Wo Nb
s 26345 Bv
- 64532 Ip Bv
- 64325 Bv Pr Bk Su Su
- 25364 Nf
- 43256 He Pr He Bk Bk
- 43562 He Hu Pr Nf Nf
- 43625 He Bo
- 56432 Yo Du Yo Du Yo
- 45632 Cm Ip Bo Ip
- 32645 Wm
- 24563 Wk St
- 24635 Wk
- 62435 Wk
- 46235 Ab No Wk
- 46352 Ab Ab
- 34652 Wk No Ab
- 34526 Wk
- 53426 Wk
- 45326 Ro Wk
- 45263 Ab No Wk
- 45632 Ne Bm Ne
- 64532 Wk Bc Wk
- 43256 Ne Bm Ne
- 24356 Wk
- 32456 Ab No No
- 32564 No
- 53264 No Ne St Ne Ro
- 64253 Ws
- 64532 Ws Ws
- 43256 Ad
- 43562 Lf Ab Wm Ab No
- 62543 No No Ne Ad
- 24356 Lf
- 45632 Ad Ab No
- 32645 No Ne Ro Ne
s 23456 
Based on a plan by Peter Ellis
Contains no 65’s at backstroke

==4) 5040 Spliced Treble-Dodging Minor (113m) – John Warboys – First rung January 2004==

This composition achieves packing the highest number of the standard 147 in a 5040-change peal to date.

23456 Ba Sd Ri Pe Ba
- 23564 Fg Ls Wv Cs Ri
s 32645 Pv Wf Os Pv Le
- 45632 Bw Cc Li Le Pm
- 64532 Km Km
- 56432 Kt Wt Kt Sn Km
- 56324 Kt Wt Kt Km Sn
- 56243 Kt Ck Kt
- 64325 Mp Pm By Md Li
- 36425 Bh By Md Co Mp
- 43625 Md Wf Ed Bt Cc
- 25643 Kt
- 62543 Cc Bt
- 35624 Kt Tr Po Sn Kt
- 24635 Bt Kh Os
- 62435 Sn Km Kt Ck Kt
- 62354 Qu Dt Sn Kt
s 34625 Ci Wv Sk Ks Pe
- 34256 Wl Wl
- 34562 Bg Dk Cf Dn Bp
- 53462 Bp Oc Rs Kn Ny
- 45362 Ny Cn Kn
- 23456 
23456 Yo Hu Ol Lv El
- 56423 Ab Ab
- 45623 Wa He Bk Pr He
- 45236 St St Me Ro Ro
- 45362 Hm Br Ab
- 56234 Ns Sl Cw Bc Wr
- 56342 Ol Bm Cb Ng Wi
- 35642 Du
- 35426 Wm Be Wm Lf Lf
- 43526 Bu Ki Wi El Bo
- 54326 Du Du Yo Du
- 63542 Wr Bo
- 63425 Ta Ma Ne Ma Ne
- 46325 Cm Bs Su Bv Su
- 34625 Cr Bo Yo
s 24563 Ct Mo Mo Ct Mo
- 24635 Sh Ml Ev Wo Ml
- 24356 Te
- 63245 Gl Mu Cl Ch Mu
- 26345 Ak Nw Nw Ak Nw
- 32645 Ak Te Fo Fo
- 32456 Te Ti Sa Fo Fo
- 43256 Av
- 43562 Lo We We Lo
- 43625 Ce Va Cd Sw Ce
- 64325 Cu Cu Av Ca Av
- 36425 Lo
- 54362 So We We Lo We
- 35462 Cu Cu Ca Cu
- 24356 Ce Va Cd Ke Sw
s 23456 
All singles are made in 1234.

==5) 5040 Spliced S Minor (21 methods) - Richard Pearce – First rung December 2000==

One criticism sometimes levelled at peals of spliced minor is that methods with the same overwork are often grouped together, which can lead to compositions feeling a bit different from spliced on higher stages.

Richard Pearce had previously shown his mastery of minor composing with an incredibly beautiful 42-spliced 5040 in complete whole courses. This was reproduced in the very first message to [[Ringing Theory]] http://www.bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2004-August/000000.html, but as it was published in 1996 pre-dates the scope of this article.

However, at the very beginning of this decade, Richard composed a notable peal of 21 methods from the Standard 41. It is extremely fluid, with a change of method every lead, but within this there is also a change of overwork at every lead. In Richard’s words, “there are at least half-a-dozen changes from any one backwork to any other backwork”.

Moreover, the composition is all-the-work, and with an exactly equal method balance. Like many of Richard’s compositions, it contains no 65s at backstroke, which some people still seem to aim for.

23456 Co Su Nb
- 23564 Du
- 23645 Ke Bo Ne Bo Ne
- 62345 Li Bv Lf Bv Lf
- 36245 Cl Du Cl Du
- 52364 Ke Bo Ne Bo Ne
- 35264 Su Nb
s 24356 Ws
- 24563 Ch Ws Ch Ws Ch
s 25463 Co Su Nb Su Nb
- 42563 Du
s 24635 Sa Bm Sa Bm
s 42356 Su Co Su Nb Co
s 43256 Sa
s 26435 Du Cl Du
s 53426 Sa
s 46532 Li Bv Lf Bv Lf
s 45632 Sa Bm Sa Bm
s 54326 Cl
s 45263 Ws Ch Ws Ch
s 23456 Ro Bk
- 56423 Wh He Wh He Wh
- 56234 Bk Ro Bk Ro
- 25634 He Wh He Wh He
s 25364 Wo Bc Wo Bc Wo
- 25643 Bc Wo Bc Wo Bc
s 25463 Bk
- 56342 Ro Bk Ro
23456 
23456 Su Nb Co
- 23564 Cl
- 23645 Bo Ne Ke Ne Ke
- 62345 Bv Lf Li Lf Li
- 36245 Du Cl Du Cl
- 52364 Bo Ne Ke Ne Ke
- 35264 Nb Co
s 24356 Ch
- 24563 Ws Ch Ws Ch Ws
s 25463 Su Nb Co Nb Co
- 42563 Cl
s 24635 Bm Sa Bm Sa Bm
s 26435 Cl Du Cl
s 53426 Bm
s 46532 Bv Lf Li Lf Li
s 45632 Bm Sa Bm Sa
s 54326 Du
s 45263 Ch Ws Ch Ws
s 23456 Bk Ro
- 56423 He Wh He Wh He
- 56234 Ro Bk Ro Bk
- 25634 Wh He Wh He Wh
s 25364 Bc Wo Bc Wo Bc
- 25643 Wo Bc Wo Bc Wo
s 25463 Ro
- 56342 Bk Ro Bk
23456 
23456 Nb Co Su
- 23564 Li Bv Li
- 23645 Ne Ke Bo Ke Bo
- 62345 Lf Li Bv Li Bv
- 36245 Lf Bv
- 52364 Ne Ke Bo Ke Bo
- 35264 Co Su
23456 
Singles are 1234 in 2nds place methods and 1456 in 6ths place methods.

==6) MUG minor – Ander Holroyd – First rung November 2004==

MUG is a simple 8-change principle (&34.2.34-, 1), with pairs of bells working together in 1-2, 3-4 and 5-6 for a division before hunting on.

Finding a set of mutually true leads is easy, but joining them together to produce an extent had proved extremely difficult. Since at least the early 1970s, composers had struggled to get a recognisably extent from the method. Graham John in particular had exhausted his patience with this. Following a long discussion on this list in the autumn of 2004, Ander Holroyd managed to put together the following:

720 MUG minor
% 2 4% 5 6 123456
-----------------------
s - 154263
s - 324615
- - 451236
-----------------------
5 part
hls = 345
bob = 4

==7) Mersey Ferry treble jump minor – Ander Holroyd – First rung June 2003==

From the sublime to the ridiculous, Mersey Ferry is the first method with no treble-fixed falseness. The treble jumps, so that it rings only once in each position in the lead, meaning that obtaining a composition for an extent trivially requires ringing every possible lead.

(13)4.(35)-(64)3.(42)- 
123456
------
231465
324615
236451
326145
312654
136245
------ 
1 2 3 2345
s s s 3524
s s 5342
s 4352
s (s)3425 
6 part, omitting (s) in parts 3 and 6
Single = 56 as treble hunts 2-1

==8) Out-of-course splicing – Richard Smith – Composed September 2004==

Richard turned his mathematical skills to analysing singles in treble-dodging minor, and generated lists of methods which splice out of course, with the results documented at http://www.bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2004-September/000175.html.

The technique had been used previously in examples by Glen Taylor, Roger Bailey and others, but Richard’s thorough and rigorous approach produced a gem of a spliced Kent and Oxford composition, exploiting the fact the two methods are out-of-course lead splices:

123456 Kt Kt
s 164253 Ox
s 126435 Kt Kt
s 154236 Ox Ox
s 162534 Kt Kt Kt
------
134256 
s = 1456
Twice repeated.

Other interesting compositions also resulted, including using out-of-course 3-lead splices:

720 Spliced Surprise Minor (4m) 
123456 Yo
s 132456 Lo Yo = York S
s 146532 Yo Yo Yo Du Du = Durham S
s 152346 We Lo = London S
s 136452 Yo Du We = Wells S
s 156324 We
------
s 134256 
s = 1236
Twice repeated

==9) Minor principles (plain course generates extent) – Chris Munday – published August 2006==

Chris Munday has published an exhaustive list of 'perfect' 6-part principle extents of minor (ie a plain course with 120 rows per lead which generates the extent), which have no more than two consecutive blows, and consist only of the changes x, 12, 14, 16, 34 and 36.

There are 141,235 such examples – none have ever been rung or to the best of my knowledge previously published. The methods can be seen at: <http://www.rrhorton.net/minor_principles.html>, and would be a significant challenge to ring.

==10) Variable treble extents based on the Hudson group – Richard Smith – First rung January 2004==

Hudson's Group is a group of order 60 that is generated by the changes 12, 16, 34. It can be used to construct interesting variable treble extents. Richard explained the theory here: http://www.bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2004-September/000110.html

Perhaps the most interesting method produced is Hudson Delight Minor (&3-3.4-2-1.4-4.5,2), which is London over the treble. The extent is simply 5*(spppps), where a single is 34. Further examples of Hudson methods can be seen here: http://www.cantabgold.net/users/pje24/hudson7.pdf

Interesting, a variable-treble extent can be achieved with precisely one “regular” treble-dodging major method – Disley Delight – as documented by Jonathan Deane in 1991. Mike Ovenden wrote an interesting deconstruction of this at: http://www.bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory_bellringers.net/2005-December/001221.html

==11) Pseudo-double Dixon's Bob Minor – Philip Saddleton - Published 2002==

The extent of Dixon’s Bob minor dates from the mid 19th century. In Dixon’s, all bell plain hunt, with 2nds being made when the treble leads, and 4ths being made when bells 2 or 4 lead. The concept can be expanded to produce a very tricky and yet elegant extent. If at alternate backstrokes, Dixon's Bob minor rules and reverse Dixon's Bob Minor rules (ie 3rds made if bells 3 or 5 are lying, and 5ths under the treble) are applied, an extent can be obtained.

720 Pseudo-Double Dixon's Bob Minor
P A B Saddleton 
23456
- 35462 4
- 43562 1
- 52346 1
- 35246 1
- 45632 2
- 64532 3
- 56432 4
- 45326 4
- 52634 1
- 65234 4
- 23546 1
- 62543 3
p 23456

The figures shown refer only to changes where the treble leads in the Dixon's section, not the reverse Dixon's section. All bobs are 14.

==12) John Warboys SU0713 which contains the 41 Surprise Minor in regular 3 part blocks of 720 changes==

After prompting by Ian Fielding, two more entries were added:-

5040 Spliced S. Minor (41 methods) SU0713 
23456 Du ) Repeat twice, calling He
- 23564 Cm Pr Bo Nf Nf ) for Bk in 2nd part, giving
- 64523 Du Hu Bk Bo ) 23456
- 42356 ) 
23456 Bo Ip Ip ) Repeat twice, calling Bv
- 23564 Yo Su Yo ) for Su in 2nd part, and
- 45236 Bo Bo ) calling single at end,
- 45362 Bo Du ) giving 24356
34256 ) 
24356 Mo Wo )
- 24563 Wo Wh Nb Cl Cl ) Repeat twice, giving 24356
- 63524 Wo Nw Ch )
- 32456 ) 
24356 Nb )
- 45632 Wo Ak Mu Ct Sa ) Repeat twice, calling Ch
- 32645 Sa ) for Mu in 2nd part, giving
- 56324 Wh Ak Sa ) 24356
43256 ) 
24356 Cu ) Repeat twice, calling Co
- 24563 Lo ) for Li in 2nd part, and
- 35246 Li Cu Cu Co ) calling single at end,
- 35462 Ke Lo We Ke ) giving 23456
43256 ) 
23456 Lf )
- 35642 Ws Lf Bm )
- 54263 No ) Repeat twice, calling Ad
- 25463 Ab Wk Bc ) for Ws in 2nd part, giving
- 42563 Ab ) 23456
- 63542 Ro St )
42356 ) 
23456 Bc )
- 64235 Wk ) Repeat twice, giving 23456
- 26435 Wm Bm Ne Ad )
- 42635 Bc No Bm )
- 42356 ) 

Alternative (1) for Norwich-over blocks: SU0714

23456 Ro Ab Ro Bc )
- 56423 Bc ) Repeat twice, giving 23456
34256 ) 
23456 Bc )
- 64235 Wk Ne Bm Lf Ws ) Repeat twice, calling Ws
- 52643 No Wk ) for Ad in 2nd part, giving
- 36524 Wm Ad Ne Bc No ) 23456
- 45362 Bc St )
34256 )

Alternative (2) for Norwich-over blocks: SU0715

23456 Bm )
- 64235 Wk )
- 26435 Bm Ne ) Repeat twice, giving 23456
- 63542 Wk No )
- 25634 Ad Lf )
- 34625 Wm Bm )
42356 ) 
23456 Ro Ab Ro
- 42356 Lf
- 25634 Bm Ab No
- 25346 Ne Bm Wm Ws
- 32546 Bc Bc
- 24653 Ws
- 24536 Bm
- 65243 Bm Ne
- 54326 No Bc St Ab
- 54263 No
- 25463 Ne Bm Lf
- 34256 Lf Bm
- 34562 Ws St
- 62534 Lf
- 23456
Compositions SU0713 and SU0714 are entirely 3-part callings with single-lead substitutions of lead splicers to ensure a plain lead of every method. All three versions contain no 65's at backstroke.
==13) Peter Ellis whole course 21 Surprise Minor (atw) with bobs only and a change of backwork every course (November 2005)==
14 or 21 SPLICED SURPRISE MINOR in whole courses 
14 methods: call Part I or III three times.
21 methods: call Part I once and Part III twice, or Part I twice and Part III once as shown below. 
PART I
123456
Warkworth -123564
Carlisle -152364
London -135264
Berwick -135642
Morpeth -135426
Bacup -135264
Cunecastre -123564
Primrose -123645
Westminster -162345
York -136245
Lightfoot -123645
Whitley -123456
Cambridge -142356
Chester -134256 
PART I
134256
Warkworth -134562
Carlisle -153462
London -145362
Berwick -145623
Morpeth -145236
Bacup -145362
Cunecastre -134562
Primrose -134625
Westminster -163425
York -146325
Lightfoot -134625
Whitley -134256
Cambridge -123456
Chester -142356 
PART III
142356
Warkworth -142563
Northumberland -154263
London -125463
Hexham -125634
Morpeth -125346
Bacup -125463
Cunecastre -142563
Norfolk -142635
Allendale -164235
York -126435
Netherseale -142635
Whitley -142356
Ipswich -134256
Munden -123456

==See Also==
*[[Compositions of the Decade 1 - Introduction]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 2 - Doubles]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 4 - Triples]]
*[[Compositions of the Decade 5 - Major]]
[[Category: Composition Reviews]]

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 2 - Doubles

2009-12-10T13:37:39Z

Pje24: /* See Also */

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 1 - Introduction

2009-12-10T13:37:27Z

Pje24: /* See Also */