New bells at Notre Dame

[ardcarp]

Apparently ND has had some brand new bells cast. The medieval ones were destroyed in The Revolution and inferior ones were subsequently installed.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/9838923/The-bells-the-bells-Paris-Notre-Dame-cathedral-to-get-new-bells.html

On the R4 news this morning it said that 'the new bells will soon
peal out over Paris'. They won't! They will clang out in a chaotic cacophony...unless that is ND has had the bells mounted in the British tradition which allows proper ringing and (in our sense) peals.

On the other hand, if one were breakfasting on coffee and croissants in a Parisian street cafe and suddenly Kent Treble Surprise Bob Maximus pealed out one might wonder why one had bothered crossing La Manche......

[MrGongGong]

I wonder how they are tuned ?
An organ historian I met a while ago told me that the tuning of churchbells could be the only reliable evidence of how some old tuning systems sounded like , and that some churches had theirs retuned because they sounded "out of tune" meaning NOT in equal temperament.

[Don Petter]

I wonder how they are tuned ?
An organ historian I met a while ago told me that the tuning of churchbells could be the only reliable evidence of how some old tuning systems sounded like , and that some churches had theirs retuned because they sounded "out of tune" meaning NOT in equal temperament.

At Notre Dame, presumably a 'Quasi' mode?

[MrGongGong]

At Notre Dame, presumably a 'Quasi' mode?

very good indeed

[ardcarp]

[LeMartinPecheur]

At Notre Dame, presumably a 'Quasi' mode?

Sorry, not ringing any bells here...

[ardcarp]

I had a hunch someone might not get it.....

[Nick Armstrong]

They will clang out in a chaotic cacophony...unless that is ND has had the bells mounted in the British tradition which allows proper ringing

That made me smile, and think of the Redburn/Flint duo in 'Billy Budd' heard last weekend...



Don't like the French.
Don't like their Frenchified ways.

Don't like the French.
Their notions don't suit us, not their ideas.

Don't like the French.
Don't like their bowing and scraping.

Don't like their hoppity-skipetty ways.

Don't like the French.
Don't like their lingo.

These damned mounseers!


I know that's not how you meant it, ardcarp!

[Cornet IV]

I wonder how they are tuned ?
An organ historian I met a while ago told me that the tuning of churchbells could be the only reliable evidence of how some old tuning systems sounded like , and that some churches had theirs retuned because they sounded "out of tune" meaning NOT in equal temperament.

Equal temperament is required only if some or all key signatures are to be employed by one or a group of instruments. Before ET, a harpsichordist (for example) would have to retune an instrument currently in (again for example) C if he wanted to play something in a remote (i.e. beyond the wolf) key like D. Church bells do not accompany musical instruments and therefore may be tuned as the bellfounder chooses - Hamburger III anyone? - but there are conventions. The tenor always will be the fundamental and the other bells in the ring will be tuned diatonically above it so that 8 bells would constitute a major octave - this is why a method rung on eight working bells might be known as Kent Treble Bob Major. Each bell individually is tuned to present five specific harmonics just to complicate things. Rings of 14 or 16 bells may have some sharp notes incorporated so that a key change or two might be contrived from employing these with the other bells.

Ardcarp's example would require twelve bells and I don't know if there are 12 bells at Notre Dame. A church of this importance in England almost certainly would have a dozen or more, although Westminster Abbey rather surprisingly has only ten - I imagine that one day they will be augmented. There are very, very, very few places on the Continent where they have bells hung to be rung in the English tradition and as far as I am aware, Paris is not one of them. We are talking about full circle changeringing and this did not start until after the Reformation and continues largely to be exclusive to the Commonwealth countries and the USA. Surprise methods are not the easiest to ring and I should be astonished if a local band could offer a decently-struck Surprise Royal or Maximus (or anything else for that matter) so that the the likelihood of coffee and croisants being disturbed by other than a "chaotic cacophony" is singularly remote.

Foreign-ness can be unalloyed . . . Enjoy!

[ardcarp]

We are talking about full circle changeringing and this did not start until after the Reformation

I bow to your fund of knowledge, Cornet, but may I respectfully postulate that the seeds sprouted a little earlier? The pre-condition for change-ringing is to have a bell (a large lump of metal weighing several hundredweight) fixed to a wooden cart-wheel with a rope going round its circumference so that, starting from an upside-down position, it can rotate through roughly 360 degrees. Directly above your head. It is not known who first dreamed up this hazardous arrangement, but it is assumed to have been a slightly deranged medieval English monk. His great idea allows the clapper to hit the bell twice per revolution, once on each side of the bell (the so-called handstroke and backstroke). To cut a long story short, man had now 'tamed' a bell and could control the rate of strike allowing a ring (set) of bells to be rung in sequence...though not at random.

The sound of large free-clapper bells swinging and singing in full cry....there is a slight vibrato too caused by the Doppler effect...cannot be equalled by a mere carillon where tiddly clappers controlled by wires ding one side of small dangling down buckets.

Sorry if it's TMI.

[Cornet IV]

I bow to your fund of knowledge, Cornet, but may I respectfully postulate that the seeds sprouted a little earlier? The pre-condition for change-ringing is to have a bell (a large lump of metal weighing several hundredweight) fixed to a wooden cart-wheel with a rope going round its circumference so that, starting from an upside-down position, it can rotate through roughly 360 degrees. Directly above your head. It is not known who first dreamed up this hazardous arrangement, but it is assumed to have been a slightly deranged medieval English monk. His great idea allows the clapper to hit the bell twice per revolution, once on each side of the bell (the so-called handstroke and backstroke). To cut a long story short, man had now 'tamed' a bell and could control the rate of strike allowing a ring (set) of bells to be rung in sequence...though not at random.

The sound of large free-clapper bells swinging and singing in full cry....there is a slight vibrato too caused by the Doppler effect...cannot be equalled by a mere carillon where tiddly clappers controlled by wires ding one side of small dangling down buckets.

Sorry if it's TMI.

Stanby whilst I engage Pedantry Mode.

No it wasn't a medieval monk; it may not have been a monk at all, although it probably was. At first, that is to say in medieval times and before, untuned bells were hung dead and the clapper was controlled by a rope. Subsequently, the headstock to which the bell crown is attached was allowed to swing and controlled by a lever to which the rope was now attached. This allowed the clapper to swing independently of the bell. In time, the lever which allowed barely more than 90 degrees of controlled rotation, was replaced by a partial wheel in the late 16th century. These advances were adopted post-Reformation which perhaps goes a little way to explain why England is virtually unique in this sphere. Continued developments gave the wheel an increased periphery and we now have the full wheel which you mention, allowing double clappering and approximately 365 degrees total rotation. Apart from the adoption of non-friction bearings for the headstock and use of man-made fibre ropes above the sally, almost nothing of a mechanical nature has happened in 400 years.

Full circle changeringing was well advanced in the 17th century; Fabian Stedman published his famous method (actually, it's not a method but a Principle) in the 1670s and ringers still struggle with it today. Stedman Triples continues to be, perhaps, the most "musical" of all ringing accomplishments.

Pedantry Mode off . . .

And I don't like "small dangling down buckets" either!

[vinteuil]

... while I much prefer the English method of change-ringing to the chaotic methods of the continentals - there is a theory that the wash of upper harmonics obtained in a jumble of French bell-ringing is what Joan (of Arc) "heard" as the voices of angels commanding her forth to do battle with the English - and certainly if you have walked the streets of, say, Strasbourg when the bells are at full tilt that story seems quite plausible.

Whether history would have been "better" if St Joan had not heard her bells / voices I leave to others : I was never much good at counter-factual history...

[MrGongGong]

A quick question for Cornet and the other Campanologists
is change ringing Music ?

[ardcarp]

Thanks for putting us all right, Cornet. If I tell you that the last time I rang was in a half-muffled peal on Winston Churchill's funeral day you will understand why I am a little hazy on the subject.

[Cornet IV]

Thanks for putting us all right, Cornet. If I tell you that the last time I rang was in a half-muffled peal on Winston Churchill's funeral day you will understand why I am a little hazy on the subject.

A quick question for Cornet and the other Campanologists
is change ringing Music ?

No, Mr GG, changeringing, contrary to what sometimes is expounded, is not music. In the universal convention, only adjacent bells may change position. For example, if you start from Rounds - Treble (1) to Tenor (6) down the scale in the order 1 2 3 4 5 6, 3 and 4 could swap places to give the order 1 2 4 3 5 6 and the following change might be 1 4 2 3 5 6 and so on. The pattern will change with each pull of the rope. What is not possible is going from Rounds to, say, 1 2 3 6 4 5, at least not without moving the bells about first. Leaving aside the principally West Country tradition of Call Changing, the hundreds of methods published in a ringing notation are algorithms and have their basis in mathematics rather than any artistic genesis. Nevertheless, when nicely rung, a good set of bells can sound very fine indeed and despite the continuing assaults on our indigenous culture, continue to be a fundamental part of the English tradition.

Don't ask why - I have no idea, but ringers regard being known as Campanologists as vaguely insulting. I avoid giving offence by referring to these people as "Tintinabulists". This seems to work, possibly because few know what it means!

As for Jeanne d'Arc, better avoided if we are to preserve any chance of borrowing their aircraft carrier. Nevertheless, I believe there is a medical term describing her condition.

Ardcarp - you outrank me, Sir. I took my son to WSC's Lying-in-State but at that time I had not been inducted into The Exercise. Incidentally, I'm sure you won't mind my indulging in a little further pedantry - I do love it! - your Kent Treble Surprise Bob Maximus is wonderfully titled but not actually possible. Surprise and Treble Bob are differing types of method as you will now remember. Half-muffled always sounds lovely and I envy you having had the privilege of ringing for this occasion.

It is one of the sadnesses of life that I have spent my time in the pursuit of things recondite instead of making any money . . . .