Talk:Handbell/Archive 1

title
In cleaning up this previously highly unencyclopedic article, I found that it made most sense to title it "handbell" rather than "bell choir." Accordingly the two pages should be swapped, so that "bell choir" redirects to "handbell." Thank you.Doops 06:43, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * PS &mdash; I'm vacillating over whether this article should have a stub tag or not. Thoughts? Doops 08:28, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

explain?
Three-octave handbell music is generally assigned in diatonic note pairs starting at low C (C4) — i.e. one ringer has low C and the D above (along with the cooresponding accidentals), one ringer has the E and F above that, and similarly until the final ringer has the B below high C and high C. Depending on the number of ringers a choir has, this method of assigning bells can be — and often is — scrapped altogether.

What does this mean? If I am assigned G & A in a piece with a sharp-based key signature, does that mean I am responsible for 4 bells? If so, it shouldn't say "note pairs" (even qualified by 'diatonic'). Doops | talk 17:03, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, that does mean that if you are playing G & A, and you are playing a key signature with sharps, you may have to use G, G sharp, A, and A sharp. So every different person that plays will have four notes, but not all at the same time. G4 A4 may need A4 sharp, but that is also B4 flat. Most of the time a single person playing a position will need 3 bells, but it may range from 1-4.

Campanile defunct?
As far as I know Campanile is quite alive and kicking - their website lists a performance date in Jan 2006? So took out the 'now defunct' bit in the article... -hegirax

Campanile is DEFUNCT. Gave their last concert weeks ago.

I wouldn't call them defunct yet. Although they don't have plans of concertizing at this time, they are planning on continuing doing workshops etc, and I'm sure for the right price they will ring again sometime. ps please sign discussions! IRing2s 12:50, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

It is my understanding that Campanile still does school shows & would play their full show again if someone hired them. Not exactly "defunct". Ladysun1969 17:04, 28 April 2006 (UTC)ladysun1969

Here's the official word from the horse's mouth: Campanile is semi-retired. This retirement has been planned for about 5 years, since two of the principal players have long been making plans to move away from the Los Angeles area this year. I'm one of them. Yes, the group would perform again, IF the situation and timing were right, however, the group is not actively soliciting work. We are eternally grateful to all our fans who have supported us all these years. We look forward to working with you in the future as coaches, clinicians, columnists, composers, conductors, publishers, and fans of yours! - Rima Greer

I would never want to argue with the horses mouth...but if you are not rehearsing and concertizing on a regular basis, then. . . that would be defined as 'defunct'. t

(Please sign your replies!) I think that the word "defunct" is not value-neutral. Can you find a better word to describe it? Perhaps "retired" or as Rima said "semi-retired"? --Ladysun1969 21:33, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

major teams
What makes a team a major team? Really we need some sort of restrictions otherwise any team will add a link to their website here. Personally I think it means "professional" teams only. -- Rc Mayhem 00:11, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

The list is even longer now. It really needs some looking at and restricting. Far too many American teams on there that are not too well known to the wider community (speaking as a brit) and should definately be looked at culling. Could someone who knows more about American teams please do this! -- Rc Mayhem 02:13 6 June 2007 (BST)

I think that the Raleigh Ringers and Sonos are the most widely-known American teams, with Sonos being perhaps the only professional team in the list. Many of the others have strong regional recognition, but the list is definitely too long. Part of the problem is the the heading of "major, active, or historically significant" is too broad. The "active" probably ought to be removed. --Etocamoe 20:44, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

This site is getting a "Raleigh Ringers present" feel to it. I think a more generic picture would be more appropo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.191.239.160 (talk) 17:18, 25 September 2007 (UTC)