Changeringing Wiki - User contributions [en-gb]

Compositions of the Decade 2000-2009 - 9 - Maximus

2014-11-06T18:21:32Z

Simpleigh: /* 1) Classic cyclic 11- and 12-parts using a link method approach – David Pipe – (November 1999 / September 2000 / August 2001) */

__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 Differential 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]]

Conducting Stedman

2009-02-10T13:17:21Z

Simpleigh:

== Conducting Stedman ==

Conducting Stedman is not something reserved for only a select few, it is achievable by just about anyone. 

There are lots of different ways to call touches of Stedman, if you are aiming to just extend the length of the ringing this can be done very easily with very few calls, these touches leave the conductor's bell unaffected and normally use only bobs or pairs of bobs, making the ringing less likely to go wrong. 

If, on the other hand, you are aiming to call a musical touch then it becomes much more difficult as bobs and singles tend to come on their own or in long sets which not only confuse the conductor but can sometimes cause the other ringers to go wrong, where it then falls squarely on the shoulders of the conductor to keep it right!
 

== Calling Positions ==

Because Stedman is a principle the treble does not lead at the lead end, so this is not a benchmark for where to make the calls, instead Stedman revolves around "Sixes" a call is made just before the end of a six. Calling Stedman on higher numbers is slightly different, and is mentioned at the end of this article. 

[[Image:callingpositions.jpg]] Above is a diagram showing a course of Stedman Triples, one course of Stedman Triples is made up of 7 leads or 14 "sixes" therefore there are 14 possible calling positions. In Stedman Triples each calling position is numbered numerically depending on where the 7th meets it in a plain course, remember that if you call a touch where you are unaffected you can just keep counting the calling positions however if you are calling a touch where you are affected you will jump to a different calling position. For example a bob or single at calling position 9 will mean that the next calling position you reach is 12 not 10. 
Calling positions like this are used only in Stedman Triples. What is important to understand from the diagram is where the calling positions are as the calls in the slow work are the same on however many bells and the positions at the end of the dodges are also the same.
Effectively you need for Stedman Triples to learn where each of these calling positions happens by heart (concentrating on the ones in the slow as getting these wrong can really confuse people in "6-7") and also learn what your next calling position will be. You can see what your next calling position will be after any bob or single from the table bellow. 

Calling Next Calling Position
Position Plain Bob Single
1 2 10 2
2 3 11 11
3 4 4 4
4 5 5 5
5 6 6 6
6 7 7 7
7 8 8 8
8 9 9 9
9 10 12 12
10 11 1 11
11 12 2 2
12 13 13 13
13 14 13 14
14 1 3 3

== Calling a Simple Touch of Stedman ==

If you are only trying to lengthen the ringing and are not worried about the music in the touch there are a couple of simple ways of doing it.
 
The first is to put in a Single in any calling position where you are unaffected and then repeat, this will give you a true 168 of Stedman with only two calls. This can be called from any bell and you can easily work out who will get the singles as only two bells out of the seven will be affected, whoever makes 5ths the first time will make 6ths the second time, and vica versa.
For example if you call the 7th with a single at 1 and repeat this will give you a true 168 with the 7th unaffected, the 6 will make 6ths the first time while the 5th will make 5ths, at the repeat the 5th will make 6ths and the 6th will make 5ths.
 
A longer touch of 252 changes can be achieved by calling yourself unaffected three times with a bob in the same way as above.
 
The other way to call a simple touch is to call one of the standard paired bob touches. On the diagram above you will notice that the calling positions 3,4 are labelled (S), 5,6 (H), 7,8 (L), 12,13 (Q), these are positions where you are unaffected by calls and you can remember the touch SQ (repeated) more easily than 3, 4, 12, 13 (repeated), while both mean the same thing.
For a two course touch or 168 changes you can call bobs at: 

S (repeated),
H (repeated),
L (repeated),
Q (repeated),
SQ (repeated),
SL (repeated),
LQ (repeated).
 
For a short touch to give people practice at bobs you can call bobs at SLQ which will give you one course (84 Changes).
One really good hint with stedman is that if you call a single anywhere where you are unaffected and repeat it will double the length of any touch.
 
This can be used to your advantage, for example if you want to call something that will give people practice at bobs call SLQ, with a single in any calling position where you are unaffected, this single can also replace one of the bobs. This will double the length of the touch and give people lots of practice.
 
If you use a single to double the length of a bob only touch, that comes round at the conventional position it will work and be true. If you add a single to a touch that already uses singles it will come round but may be false. Do not add singles like this to touches that come round in odd positions e.g. the length is not divisible by 12 or that come round at Handstroke.
 

== Calling a Musical Touch ==

Calling a musical touch is actually quite easy, most standard musical touches of Stedman triples will lock the 4 and 6 up in "6-7" giving lots of "468" roll ups often giving Queens, Kings or Whittingtons. 
The only difference in calling a musical touch is that you as the conductor will most likely be affected. This is where you need to know what the bobs and singles do with regards to your calling positions.(see table above)
As an example we will take the 144 change touch as in the Ringing world diary. The touch is written out, s1, s4, s8, 9, 12, 13 (repeat),(from 7th). Meaning that this touch is to be called from the 7th. 
You should instantly see that as the 7th's first calling position is 1, that there will be a single immediately, you are not affected by this call. The next single happens at your first whole turn, this is at the Handstroke, it is important not to get into the habbit of calling it at the backstroke as this can confuse the bells in "6-7". The next single is at 8 which is the 3rds leaving the slow, again this is at handstroke. 
This is where it gets interesting, at the next calling position, 9 you have to put in a bob, which you are affected by. From the table above you will see that this means that your next calling position is 12, so the next bob happens straight away. The last bob happens as you come out quick in your first blow in 2nds. This is then repeated, remember that the 7th must return to it's home position before you repeat, so make sure you count the 14th calling position.
 
Another simple musical touch of Stedman triples is: s4.5.s7.s12.13.s4.s7.s12.13
The 7th is unaffected throughout and the touch comes round at the end of the slow six at 166 changes.
 
A slightly more complicated touch is: 1.2.11.2.11.3.4.5.6.7.s8.12.1.10.1.10 and comes round shortly after at 173 changes, and contains Queens, Tittums & Whittingtons.
 

== Conducting Stedman on higher numbers ==

The standard notation for Stedman Caters and Cinques is to count the number of sixes which have passed rather than to call using calling positions for example if you take the 9th to a touch of Stedman Caters and call a bob at one, the next number to count is two not ten as it would be in triples, so whatever happens just keep counting. In most quarter peal compositions you should count up to 18 which is of course the number of sixes in a plain course of Stedman Caters however some composition will require you to count only to 16 or up to 24 which should be noted in the calling. However in some touches especially in the RW diary this information is neglected so you need to check where your bell appears in the numbers to the left of the touch.
A standard and quite musical touch for Stedman Caters is the 207 in the diary, this initaialy puts the bells into a tittums coursing, then into handstroke homes and is the basis of many quarter peals, the calling is: 
1, 4, 6, 7 s10, 12, 13 (16 sixes)
2, s9 

This should be fairly simple to call as a first touch, calling from the 9th, the first bob leaves you dodging up the back, the second is in 6-7 down, the next two are when you are in the slow, the same calling positions as triples (4 & 5), the s10 is called as you leave the slow (position 8), the next bob causes you to make 7ths and come back down, don't forget to call the second bob before you leave 6-7. On to the easier bit the bob at 2 is in 8=9 with the 8th and the s9 again makes you turn around in 6-7.
 
This can be called from anywhere I think the easiest bell is probably the 7th as you actually meet the calling positions in the same order as a course of Stedman Triples. 

== Calling a Quarter peal of Stedman Triples ==

The RW diary has several quarter peals that are based on paired calls, this is probably the easiest place to start. My personal favourite of these, as it’s the only one I can ever remember is HQ,HQ,LQ so 5.6.12.13 5.6.12.13 7.8.12.13 this is called five times, the lead end rotates like this 5123467 at the end of each section so it is easy to keep an eye on whether anybody has swapped.
 

== Calling a Quarter peal of Stedman Caters or Cinques ==

When calling a quarter of Stedman Caters or Cinques the normal “shape” is to put the bells into Tittums coursing, then some padding, put the bells into the handstroke home position, then more padding to finish. The bells are rearranged using what are normally called Turning Courses and tend to have quite a few calls in, an example quarter of Stedman Caters is shown below;

1299 Stedman Caters
D.Brady
231456789 15
------------
234165978 a
------------
2413 2 |
2314 s |A
2143 2 |
------------
234165879 b
2143 A
------------
a = 1.7s.8.9.15.18s
b = 2.s9.s15

I would suggest calling this off of the 7th as you are fixed throughout, this is quite simple to call as in the blocks of A only the 1,3,4 rotate around. Another standard quarter peal calling for caters is the 1287 in the diary based on the touch above starting 1.4.6.7... it is important to note that that the first course is 16 sixes whilst all the rest are 18. The quarter of 1299 above can be called as a touch of 219 by simply calling a,b. 

For quarters of Stedman Cinques the standard course length is 22 sixes an example quarter peal composition is shown below;

1313 Stedman Cinques
D.Brady
2314567890E 18
--------------
12345687E90 a
1342 2
1243 s
1432 2
1324658709E b
1243 2
1342 s
--------------
a = 1.s6.7.8.s10.12.13.16.s18 (20)
b = 1.3.4.s8.9.10.12.13.17.s21.22

Note that the first course is only 20 sixes long. Again this quarter can be shortened to a touch by calling a,b this will be 257 changes.

Stedman

2009-02-10T13:15:30Z

Simpleigh:

Stedman is a commonly-rung wrong-place [[principle]], ringable on odd [[stage]]s. It has quite a simple structure, but remains difficult to compose and conduct. Despite this it has become popular, being rung to many [[peal]]s each year.

==History==
Stedman is named for [[Fabian Stedman]], who first described it.

==Structure==
Stedman Doubles: 3.1.5.3.1.3.1.3.5.1.3.1

Stedman is characterised by plain-hunting within the front three places, and double-dodging elsewhere. The lead of 12 changes can be divided into two blocks, or "sixes", which are termed Quick and Slow. The sixes are distinguished depending on the work of the front three bells - Quick sixes have right hunting, and Slow sixes have wrong hunting. Slightly inconveniently, the method is usually rung to start from the fourth row of a Quick six. The sixes are joined by plain hunting - n'ths place is made at handstroke.

Quick Six: n.1.3.1.3.1
Slow Six: n.3.1.3.1.3

The primary difficulty in ringing Stedman is in determining the type of six, which affects what to do when a ringer arrives at the front of the [[change]]. There are [[Stedman_-_Quick_or_Slow|various ways]] of working this out.

==Calls==
Calls in Stedman [[Doubles]] are different to those on all other stages. A plain course of Stedman Doubles contains all [[Parity|in-course]] rows, so an extent can be easily constructed by calling a [[Single]] to swap a pair of bells, ringing the out-of-course rows, and then swapping the bells back with another single. This single is made in the middle of a six, and affects the two bells dodging behind. Unlike singles in Stedman on other stages, the calls in Doubles form a line of symmetry in the ringing.

Calls in Triples or higher stages alter the place made between the sixes. A [Bob] in Stedman Triples changes the 7ths place for 5ths, effecting a three-way rotation on the three back bells. A single replaces 7ths with the notation 567.

==Composing and Conducting==
Please see [[Conducting Stedman]]

----

[[Stedman - Quick or Slow]] 
[[Conducting Stedman]]

Stedman

2009-02-10T13:12:26Z

Simpleigh: /* Structure */

Stedman is a commonly-rung wrong-place [[principle]], ringable on odd [[stage]]s. It has quite a simple structure, but remains difficult to compose and conduct. Despite this it has become popular, being rung to many [[peal]]s each year.

==Structure==
Stedman Doubles: 3.1.5.3.1.3.1.3.5.1.3.1

Stedman is characterised by plain-hunting within the front three places, and double-dodging elsewhere. The lead of 12 changes can be divided into two blocks, or "sixes", which are termed Quick and Slow. The sixes are distinguished depending on the work of the front three bells - Quick sixes have right hunting, and Slow sixes have wrong hunting. Slightly inconveniently, the method is usually rung to start from the fourth row of a Quick six. The sixes are joined by plain hunting - n'ths place is made at handstroke.

Quick Six: n.1.3.1.3.1
Slow Six: n.3.1.3.1.3

The primary difficulty in ringing Stedman is in determining the type of six, which affects what to do when a ringer arrives at the front of the [[change]]. There are [[Stedman_-_Quick_or_Slow|various ways]] of working this out.

==Calls==
Calls in Stedman [[Doubles]] are different to those on all other stages. A plain course of Stedman Doubles contains all [[Parity|in-course]] rows, so an extent can be easily constructed by calling a [[Single]] to swap a pair of bells, ringing the out-of-course rows, and then swapping the bells back with another single. This single is made in the middle of a six, and affects the two bells dodging behind. Unlike singles in Stedman on other stages, the calls in Doubles form a line of symmetry in the ringing.

Calls in Triples or higher stages alter the place made between the sixes. A [Bob] in Stedman Triples changes the 7ths place for 5ths, effecting a three-way rotation on the three back bells. A single replaces 7ths with the notation 567.

[[Stedman - Quick or Slow]] 
[[Conducting Stedman]]

Stedman

2009-02-10T13:06:09Z

Simpleigh: /* Structure */

Stedman is a commonly-rung wrong-place [[principle]], ringable on odd [[stage]]s. It has quite a simple structure, but remains difficult to compose and conduct. Despite this it has become popular, being rung to many [[peal]]s each year.

==Structure==
Stedman Doubles: 3.1.5.3.1.3.1.3.5.1.3.1

Stedman is characterised by plain-hunting within the front three places, and double-dodging elsewhere. The lead of 12 changes can be divided into two blocks, or "sixes", which are termed Quick and Slow. The sixes are distinguished depending on the work of the front three bells - Quick sixes have right hunting, and Slow sixes have wrong hunting. Slightly inconveniently, the method is usually rung to start from the fourth row of a Quick six. The sixes are joined by plain hunting - n'ths place is made at handstroke.

Quick Six: n.1.3.1.3.1
Slow Six: n.3.1.3.1.3

The primary difficulty in ringing Stedman is in determining the type of six, which affects what to do when a ringer arrives at the front of the [[change]]. There are [[Stedman_-_Quick_or_Slow|various]] ways of working this out.

[[Stedman_-_Quick_or_Slow]]
[[Conducting Stedman]]

Stedman

2009-02-10T13:04:00Z

Simpleigh:

Stedman is a commonly-rung wrong-place [[principle]], ringable on odd [[stage]]s. It has quite a simple structure, but remains difficult to compose and conduct. Despite this it has become popular, being rung to many [[peal]]s each year.

==Structure==
Stedman Doubles: 3.1.5.3.1.3.1.3.5.1.3.1

Stedman is characterised by plain-hunting within the front three places, and double-dodging elsewhere. The lead of 12 changes can be divided into two blocks, or "sixes", which are termed Quick and Slow. The sixes are distinguished depending on the work of the front three bells - Quick sixes have right hunting, and Slow sixes have wrong hunting. Slightly inconveniently, the method is usually rung to start from the fourth row of a Quick six. The sixes are joined by plain hunting - n'ths place is made at handstroke.

Quick Six: n.1.3.1.3.1
Slow Six: n.3.1.3.1.3

The primary difficulty in ringing Stedman is in determining the type of six, which affects what to do when a ringer arrives at the front of the [[change]].

[[Conducting Stedman]]

Maximus

2009-02-10T12:36:17Z

Simpleigh: Redirecting to Stage