DCI PRESENTATION UNCOVERED
Sis
At the DCI meetings in January, George Hopkins of YEA! made a 45 minute presentation Setting the stage for the 10 rules proposals he had before the body. The presentation is only so telling without Hopkins to deliver verbal support, But, we thought you might like to take a look. The basic premise -- Drum Corps has done itself harm through separating from the band world. As the band world has improved year after year, the corps world has maintained a rather elitist attitude. Today, we sit with 700 participants and 300,000 fans nationwide. Meanwhile -- 2,000,000 young people march in bands! Drum corps is a great program for young people. It needs to be shared -- But perhaps -- It needs to be shared through pre-existing vehicles. Perhaps not all have to come around to the corps way of thinking. Enjoy the presentation -- It will only be up for a short time -- But -- For those avid visitors to www.yea.org, we thought it might be of some interest. If comment is necessary, you can write to Hopkins at hop...@yea.org.
The following is the power point presentation:
Drum Corps Is Marching Band: Discussion of the Rules We Love To Hate
Corps are Bands---YUCK!!!!!!
*We tell people we are not a band.
*We believe corps are better than bands.
*We grow up thinking and saying that bands sucks (sic)
Bands Get Better
*Bands hired our people.
*Bands bought our arrangements.
*Bands went to our clinics.
*Bands hired our staff
*Bands used their own talent to learn more and do more.
Bands Become The PlayGround For Creativity
*Bands use amplification.
*Bands use electronics.
*Bands utilize show themes.
*Bands use dance --- and hire dance instructors.
*Bands use voiceovers.
*Bands use costuming (they have money).
Meanswhile, back at the farm
*We took 10 years to add a third valve
*We took 10 years to go to any key.
*We turned away from amplification, electronics, number proposals, indeed --- most any proposal of any kind.
*We kept the name drum and bugle corps, even though we had no bugles.
*INDEED we reinforced the notion that what we do is good --- and not to be compared to the marching band world.
AND ... as we won in our fight to be the same
*Our audience shrank
*BUFFALO 1990 30,000.
*BUFFALO 1995 25,000
*BUFFALO 2000 16,000 (sic)
*Our # of corps shrank.
*The finances of the corps became precariously challenging.
BUT --- we protected the farm
*The believers continue to extol the virtues of the institution called drum and bugle corps.
*The believers "scream for the heads" of those who seek something different.
*The leaders, having power within their autocratic rule, retreat to the castle, where edicts can be proclaimed. All is good they say. Change is bad.
Change Kept On A Comin'
*The economy of the activity changes.
*School year change.
*Stadium use becomes an issue.
*Music changes.
*Technology changes.
*The interests of young people change
*Society changes (Bowling Alone).
*School music programs are challenged.
AND DRUM CORPS STAYS THE SAME.
Falling further away from the times.
Moving All the Closer to the Cliff Called Inconsequential.
Drum Corps looks a bit like
*The Catholic Church
*The Opera
*Brass Bands
*The Mummers
NOW WHAT?
BEGIN TODAY to define who we are and attach to another world
*CHOOSE ENTERTAINMENT
*LET PEOPLE IN
Entertainment --- 180 people
*Allow for more options.
*Guards grow.
*More options in instrumentation.
*Effects can be bigger.
*Choices are more.
Entertainment --- Amplification
*We can hear the pit.
*We can use instruments now not heard.
*We can use voices.
*We can dictate a story line (if we choose)
*People might actually come to understand what we are doing.
Entertainment --- The Encore
*How cool is this? The people like you and you let them have a little more - Right away
*Kick in a "Jam"
*Play a fan favorite
Entertainment --- THE FREAKS
*Eliminating Warm-Ups is attached to playing while leaving.
*It will take a tad longer to get on......
*So perhaps a bit less banging and chord playing
*With a few exceptions
*Warm Ups are Warm Ups
*BORING!!!!
Entertainment --- Length of Show
*We need the time to CRANK an audience.
*Extended phrases.
*Percussion solos
*Finishing a phrase.
*Playing a ballad Not on speed
70 per cent of shows are longer than 11 minutes.
*50 per cent are ll:l5 or longer
*20 per cent are ll:30 or longer
Entertainment --- The Sidelines
*Do what you have to do
*Put stuff where you have to
*STOP WATCHING US!!!!!!!
*<the Sideline is still there --- you can just put stuff where it needs to be to clear some room
Entertainment --- SAXES
*Ever heard a great sax solo?
*Ever heard a great sax quartet?
*Ever hear a big band without saxes?
*Ever wonder what Tower of Power might sound (sic) within a corps with saxes?
Entertainment --- GE Judges
*We need for the judge to see us the way the people see us
*Multiple exposures reduce the effect
*FRESH EYES AND EARS
Entertainment --- Pull From the Hat
*Let the corps pick their poison (sic?)
*Lesson the politics
*Make it an event - a webcast
*Decrease the time spent working and wondering and influencing who is judging finals
LET PEOPLE IN --- Age
*6 months added
*Most kids are still in school
*Many more kids get a late start in corps
*We can do more with seasoned members
Let People in --- Saxes
*The door creaks open to band kids
*A new constituency
*Let's look to the best marching bands in the world
*Extreme Band
*A place to go --- a natural extension.
More on Saxes - Kind of?
*Vendors want to sell to bands.
*2 million kids march in band
*We have 300,000 fans.
*We have 7,000 performers
*A NEW AUDIENCE
WE ARE NOT DIFFERENT - WE ARE YOU
Now what? == Part 1
*Reconsider that our strongly held opinions might be wrong.
*Allow for possibility
*Share what is fabulous about corps
*Look around. What would it be like to have 2000 people here and not 190?
*VOTE YES
*CHANGE THE WORLD
Thanks for your participation in the greatest unknown youth activity in the world!
Sadly submitted,
Jackie
*
Catherine
Actually, if one substitutes "DCI" for all uses of "Drum corps" and
"corps", I wouldn't have anything "negitive" to say, but for one other
substitution:
"Drum corps is a great program for young people" should become "DCI
is a great program for wannabes-in-training".
I'd also suggest that the usual substitutions for horns (brass), drums
(percussion) and guards (auxiliary) - also for corpsmembers (students)
and individual corps (teams).
The rest of it then becomes the "I'M INVINCEABLE" marketing DCI is
infamous for.
-- Catherine
Sis
Drum Corps looks a bit like
*The Catholic Church
Then Hopkins looks a bit like ________________
fill in the blank.
Jackie
Dennis Doherty
I am not sure if I ubderstand this statement. With 128 members per corps, this translates into an existence of only 5 and a half (5.5) corps in existence today. So I guess the elitist consist only of the top 5 or 6 corps. What an assinine statement. Either George is not a math major, or he is a true elitist (stuck up bastard).The sad partis before DCI (pre-1972), there were hundreds of corps. Sometimes more than one in each city. Granted, the corps were half the size they are today, but even at 65 members per corps times 100 equals 6,500 members.The whole Powerpoint presentation makes me sick. It smacks of desperation. Drum Corps in fact may be dying based on this presentation, and it is Georges desparate attempt to stay alive. To rule his own little world. "....hey lets make it band so we can suck the blood out of bando's, after all drum corps is dead and I need to survive....." That's what it sounds like.DRUM CORPS IS DEAD, LONG LIVE DRUM CORPS
Dennis Doherty
"Sis" <sist...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:3E461880...@worldnet.att.net...
Mike Poche
>AND ... as we won in our fight to be the same
> *Our audience shrank
> *BUFFALO 1990 30,000.
> *BUFFALO 1995 25,000
> *BUFFALO 2000 16,000 (sic)
Of course none of this was due to losing the average people going to be
entertained that didn't have musical training ?
While I admitt that the shows are very advanced, the old "get em off their
feet and give them chill bumps" in too many cases was thrown out the window.
My God, one of the main reasons so many ochestras are having hard times is
because there are fewer people that are classicaly interested. When so much
of the corps chows become the same, do you not think THAT has an effect on the
audience numbers ?
I see more and more bands in this area getting boos at halftime because they
present themselves as snobs to their greatest audiences. What a shame those
band directors are putting those kids through that.
> *Our # of corps shrank.
Lack of corps that would take almost any kid and train and teach them as
opposed to those who must hold auditions in several parts of the country so
that they become more of an "Honor Band" as opposed to a local drum and bugle
cops with community roots.
> *The finances of the corps became precariously challenging.
Has nothing to do with national tours, haveing to buy new equipment to meet
the new rules on what is allowed, money for auditions,, etc.
SOMEONE PLEASE OPEN THEIR EYES
The OTHER Mike
2002 gRAMDie Best New Smartass of the Year
Big Rich Soprano
>religion. Did anyone ask him what he meant by this?
Especially since drum corps is not under fire for child molesting.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from Magic!
- Arthur C. Clarke's Third Law
Richard V. Lamb
treasonous and heretical piece of propaganda.
"Sis" <sist...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:3E460F1F...@worldnet.att.net...
>From http://www.yea.org (for those of you who had trouble reading the power
point >presentation)
>
>At the DCI meetings in January, George Hopkins of YEA! made a 45 minute
presentation >Setting the stage for the 10 rules proposals he had before the
body.
George still doesn't seem to understand why Levi Boldt gave him a writing
guide back in 1997!
> The presentation is only so telling without Hopkins to deliver verbal
support, But, we thought >you might like to take a look. The basic
premise -- Drum Corps has done itself harm through >separating from the band
world.
Drum corps did quite well being separate from bands for the first 50+ years
of its history, thank you. It was when drum corps and bands began
approaching each other during the 1970s that drum corps began to suffer from
"shrinking pains."
> As the band world has improved year after year, the corps world has
maintained a rather elitist > attitude. Today, we sit with 700 participants
7000--even Hopkins himself said that many.
> and 300,000 fans nationwide.
I was actually impressed to read that number--when a friend of mine who is a
marketer and I did a back of the envelope calculation on how big the market
for junior corps is, we came up with less than 100,000.
>Meanwhile -- 2,000,000 young people march in bands!
And how many people still alive *used* to go to shows but don't anymore?
How many people used to go to shows in Quebec alone, but don't now because
DCI (not the local show sponsor) pulled the plug on the Montreal show (the
second oldest on the DCI tour after DCI Championships) because the big boys
didn't want to go there anymore?
>Drum corps is a great program for young people. It needs to be shared --
But perhaps -- It >needs to be shared through pre-existing vehicles.
Drum corps is a pre-existing vehicle!
>Perhaps not all have to come around to the corps way of thinking. Enjoy the
presentation -- It >will only be up for a short time
Thanks to Google (and Jackie 'Sis' Fritsche) it will be up as long as Google
is. Thanks Jackie!
>-- But -- For those avid visitors to www.yea.org, we thought it might be of
some interest. If >comment is necessary, you can write to Hopkins at
hop...@yea.org.
Comment here is just fine. IMHO, any attempt to write to Hopkins will just
result in an attempt to sell you on his plan. Unless you want that, don't
bother. The most you can do is either annoy him, confirm to him that we're
all Neanderthals, or amuse him with what he perceives as your 'ignorant,
anti-progressive attitude'. Most of the times he was badmouthing us, he was
smirking. It took me a few days to figure it out, but I realized he looked
as if he were either laughing at us, getting off on being the center of our
attention, or both. That realization infuriated me. I have some ideas on
how to wipe that smirk off his face. If you're interesting in helping me do
that, email me.
>The following is the power point presentation:
Hopkins had some little difficulty getting his laptop to work, which
prompted me to observe "Gee, George, if you can't handle a PowerPoint
presentation, maybe you can't handle electronics!" :->
BTW, Hopkins knew that his speech would be controversial. Before he started
the presentation he said "If you don't like chocolate, then you won't like
chocolate cake, you won't like chocolate pudding, and you won't like
chocolate ice cream. If you don't like the opening of this talk, then you
aren't going to like any of it-it's all chocolate!"
>Drum Corps Is Marching Band: Discussion of the Rules We Love To Hate
I mentioned that George wrote his presentation backwards. That's because he
put the conclusion he wanted to reach first and his assumptions, goals, and
reasoning, such as it is, last or near the end. I think if his assumptions
and goals were placed first, there would be better lines of reasoning that
would produce different conclusions!
>Corps are Bands---YUCK!!!!!!
> *We tell people we are not a band.
> *We believe corps are better than bands.
> *We grow up thinking and saying that bands sucks (sic)
He described how, 25-30 years ago, almost none of the members of the
Crossmen were also in bands, but now nearly every member of The Cadets was
either in a high school or college band and that very few of them had
marched another corps first. He also noted that insisting that a corps was
a band would likely get one beaten up. Guess what? It might still be true,
although we'll have to find legal, peaceful, non-violent ways to do the
'beating up.'
>Bands Get Better
> *Bands hired our people.
Because corps were better.
> *Bands bought our arrangements.
Because corps had better arrangements for the field.
> *Bands went to our clinics.
Because corps were better.
> *Bands hired our staff
Redundant!
> *Bands used their own talent to learn more and do more.
Drum corps work ethic rubs off on bands!
>Bands Become The PlayGround For Creativity
> *Bands use amplification.
Not a creative way to get loud.
> *Bands use electronics.
Not a creative way to get sound effects. Which was more creative--SCV and
Kiwanis Kavaliers producing the sound of a helicopter using drums or playing
a tape of a helicopter?
> *Bands utilize show themes.
So do drum corps--theme shows have been in and out of fashion since 1970!
> *Bands use dance --- and hire dance instructors.
Corps have been dancing since 1971, if you cite SCV's Bottle Dance as the
first, or the 1950s, if you pay attention to the Madison Scouts. However,
if corps insist on dancing, hiring a dance instructor might actually be a
good idea.
> *Bands use voiceovers.
Empire Statesmen in DCA have used voice-overs before judging starts for
years. Is there anything in the DCI rules that would prevent *that*?
> *Bands use costuming (they have money).
Corps have used costuming since the Madison Scouts in 1970 (Alice in
Wonderland show). As for the part about the money--as my favorite .sig of
Levi Boldt's said: "Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most
of the time he will pick himself up and continue." - Winston Churchill.
Hey, George, have a nice trip. See you next fall!
Gee, George, counting two of your points as two-parters, that's 1 out of 7
(the second part of the second two-parter was a base on balls, an error, or
a hit batter, none of which count)--you're batting 0.143. That would get
you sent down to the minors!
>Meanswhile, back at the farm
> *We took 10 years to add a third valve
> *We took 10 years to go to any key.
> *We turned away from amplification, electronics, number proposals,
indeed --- most any
> proposal of any kind.
In retrospect, George, frustrating you has turned out to be a *good* thing!
> *We kept the name drum and bugle corps, even though we had no bugles.
1. According to the New Harvard Dictionary of Music, the two-valve G horns
used in drum corps--even today--are bugles. If that dictionary had been
revised since 1990, it would probably list the three-valve G horns as
bugles, too. According to what is arguably the most authoritative source of
definitions in music, drum corps still has bugles!
2. If Hopkins wants to argue that the Bb/F brass that most of the top 12 in
DCI are using are not bugles, fine, but Canadian and British corps have been
using Bb infantry bugles for more than 100 years--and I dare anyone to say
that Scout House Alumni, who play on Bb brass, don't call their horns
'bugles'! Besides which, *Hopkins* were the one pushing for corps to use
Bb/F brass. If he wants to say they're not bugles and cites the Harvard
Dictionary of Music, he should remember that he and Dave Gibbs are to blame
for *that* state of affairs!
3. If Hopkins is such a marketing 'genkus' then he should recognize the
brand value in Drum Corps and understand that alone would drive us to keep
the name!
> *INDEED we reinforced the notion that what we do is good --- and not to
be compared to > the marching band world.
About this point in his talk, Hopkins made a reference to how difficult it
was to pick up the girls at "Hogs and Honeys", a bar near the hotel, by
saying that he was with a drum corps. He said that if he told them he was
with a marching band, they'd at least figure out he was a 'band geek' and
know how to deal with him.
>AND ... as we won in our fight to be the same
Actually, that fight was lost--junior drum corps does *not* look or sound
the same today as in 1972, 1982, or even 1992, despite Hopkins' complaints
of staleness and boredom!
> *Our audience shrank
> *BUFFALO 1990 30,000.
> *BUFFALO 1995 25,000
> *BUFFALO 2000 16,000 (sic)
The next day, Larry Hershman of the Bluecoats noted that, with all the Div.
I corps playing at three focus shows (San Antonio, Indianapolis, and
Allentown/Philadelphia) and other big events showcasing at least half the
corps (Drums along the Rockies, Murfreesboro, and now DeKalb), 'finals' had
been brought to the fans and fewer fans actually needed to travel to
championships. That has been DCI's spin on declining attendance. FWIW, DCI
seems to be OK with this, as the number of events they run has gone up,
total attendance at DCI events has gone up, and DCI's revenue is up (DCI has
run a surplus for 3 years and has *no* long-term debt). Besides, lower
finals attendance is *RAMD's* evidence that things are going wrong. Heh,
George using our own reasoning against us!
> *Our # of corps shrank.
> *The finances of the corps became precariously challenging.
And amplification, electronics, saxophones, and 180 members wouldn't make
both of those worse?
>BUT --- we protected the farm
He was sarcastic about this.
> *The believers continue to extol the virtues of the institution called
drum and bugle corps.
This is a *good* thing!
> *The believers "scream for the heads" of those who seek something
different.
This is one of the places where he dissed the fans on the Internet. He
mentioned death threats by email--after he smirked and rolled his eyes.
> *The leaders, having power within their autocratic rule, retreat to the
castle, where edicts can > be proclaimed. All is good they say.
Change is bad.
Here is where he tried to portray himself as a progressive and a 'democrat'.
He mentioned that DCI was thinking of ceasing to have the Instructors Summit
and Tour Event Partners Seminar because of poor attendance--and he was
saying it to an overflow crowd! Turns out he was right. Dan Acheson was in
favor of suspending it because DCI loses money on it. George argued in
favor of keeping it. George got his way. For once, I'm glad he did!
>Change Kept On A Comin'
> *The economy of the activity changes.
And YEA! is a leader in changing the economy of the activity!
> *School year change.
> *Stadium use becomes an issue.
> *Music changes.
> *Technology changes.
> *The interests of young people change
Yeah, but does George really know *how* they've changed? I'm not confident
he does.
> *Society changes (Bowling Alone).
George used this as a reason to give up on the past. He seemed to ignore
the parts of the book about how youth and arts organizations can reverse the
trends he mentioned.
> *School music programs are challenged.
Which Ken Mazur cites as a reason why drum corps should compete for members
with bands, not suck up to them (and it was one of the reasons for Phantom
Regiments' rise to greatness in 1976--Rockford cut school music programs and
PR went from ~10th to ~4th. Ken just happened to have marched PR that
year.)
>AND DRUM CORPS STAYS THE SAME.
Not strictly true.
>Falling further away from the times.
That might not be a bad thing. The times today are terrible--ask Shawn
Hines! (Sorry, couldn't resist! :-)
>Moving All the Closer to the Cliff Called Inconsequential.
And Hopkins (and Gibbs, and Cesario, and Downey) is the one leading junior
corps there.
>Drum Corps looks a bit like
> *The Catholic Church
The largest denomination in the US and one which is *growing*, according to
the latest survey in Scientific American, which has no sectarian axe to
grind!
> *The Opera
Also growing, according to National Public Radio, because it's able to
attract young fans.
> *Brass Bands
Drum corps should be that healthy and involved in the community.
> *The Mummers
Stuart handled this one.
>NOW WHAT?
Steve Powers once told me that the best thing for junior drum corps would be
for both Scott Stewart and George Hopkins to leave the activity. One down,
one to go!
>BEGIN TODAY to define who we are
Good idea.
> and attach to another world
Bad idea.
> *CHOOSE ENTERTAINMENT
> *LET PEOPLE IN
Actually, I don't disagree with these goals. I just think there are better
ways to get there than giving up on drum corps' unique identity and 80 years
of tradition.
>Entertainment --- 180 people
No, this is "let people in".
> *Allow for more options.
George is bored.
> *Guards grow.
I disagree with George--30+ guard is enough. UCLA band had 225 musicians
and 36 guard when I was the guard instructor and that was fine.
> *More options in instrumentation.
> *Effects can be bigger.
> *Choices are more.
George is bored.
>Entertainment --- Amplification
> *We can hear the pit.
We can already hear the pit.
> *We can use instruments now not heard.
> *We can use voices.
> *We can dictate a story line (if we choose)
> *People might actually come to understand what we are doing.
Write simpler shows; they'll understand then.
>Entertainment --- The Encore
> *How cool is this? The people like you and you let them have a little
more - Right away
> *Kick in a "Jam"
> *Play a fan favorite
Pioneer already plays an encore. What's stopping the rest of the corps?
>Entertainment --- THE FREAKS
He dissed us again here.
> *Eliminating Warm-Ups is attached to playing while leaving.
> *It will take a tad longer to get on......
> *So perhaps a bit less banging and chord playing
> *With a few exceptions
> *Warm Ups are Warm Ups
Blue Devils voted against this. :->
> *BORING!!!!
I told you George was getting bored.
>Entertainment --- Length of Show
> *We need the time to CRANK an audience.
> *Extended phrases.
> *Percussion solos
> *Finishing a phrase.
> *Playing a ballad Not on speed
1. This is actually a 'Back to the Future' proposal--corps used to play
shows this long.
2. George finally admitted that competition mattered. He described how he
timed corps and sometimes hoped that some would go overtime! FWIW, he also
admitted that he was once a socialist, but Dave Gibbs turned him into a
Republican.
> 70 per cent of shows are longer than 11 minutes.
> *50 per cent are ll:l5 or longer
> *20 per cent are ll:30 or longer
Wow, George actually used facts in a way that made sense. I'm impressed.
>Entertainment --- The Sidelines
> *Do what you have to do
> *Put stuff where you have to
> *STOP WATCHING US!!!!!!!
George doesn't like T&P and other restrictions. Neither, it seemed, did
anyone else. This was passed unanimously by both instructors and directors.
> *<the Sideline is still there --- you can just put stuff where it needs
to be to clear some room
>Entertainment --- SAXES
> *Ever heard a great sax solo?
> *Ever heard a great sax quartet?
> *Ever hear a big band without saxes?
Yes, Stan Kenton had one with mellophoniums instead of saxes. One of the
original arrangements of "Fanfare for the New" was for that band. It kicked
ass. Next!
> *Ever wonder what Tower of Power might sound (sic) within a corps with
saxes?
No, because then it wouldn't be a corps. It would be a band!
>Entertainment --- GE Judges
> *We need for the judge to see us the way the people see us
> *Multiple exposures reduce the effect
> *FRESH EYES AND EARS
The judges really didn't like this proposal--nor did the rest of the task
force on adjudication.
>Entertainment --- Pull From the Hat
> *Let the corps pick their poison (sic?)
> *Lesson the politics
'And how many hours a day did you do lessons?' said Alice, in a hurry to
change the subject.
'Ten hours the first day,' said the Mock Turtle: 'nine the next, and so on.'
'What a curious plan!' exclaimed Alice.
'That's the reason they're called lessons,' the Gryphon remarked: 'because
they lessen from day to day.'
> *Make it an event - a webcast
> *Decrease the time spent working and wondering and influencing who is
judging finals
Gee, George, finally getting tired of that game?
>LET PEOPLE IN --- Age
> *6 months added
> *Most kids are still in school
> *Many more kids get a late start in corps
Yadda, yadda, yadda--even though I was actually with him on this one.
> *We can do more with seasoned members
Bingo!
>Let People in --- Saxes
> *The door creaks open to band kids
Brass, percussion, and guard in band are already in.
> *A new constituency
Yeah, 2 million band kids. Can you get them and still keep the old fans?
> *Let's look to the best marching bands in the world
Actually, George said "Let's become the best marching bands in the world"
George is much better saying something than writing it out and he can really
work a room.
> *Extreme Band
Hey, Stuart--here's your "extreme marching"!
> *A place to go --- a natural extension.
That's fine. At the top level, junior corps is already there.
>More on Saxes - Kind of?
> *Vendors want to sell to bands.
Follow the money. *One* drum sponsor gives DCI $20,000 a year--and DCI has
about 20 sponsors!
> *2 million kids march in band
And how many of them are sax players?
> *We have 300,000 fans.
> *We have 7,000 performers
There are other ways to increase the number of performers than the ways
George suggests.
> *A NEW AUDIENCE
New Coke! Yeah, that was a great success. :-/
> WE ARE NOT DIFFERENT - WE ARE YOU
At least when the Borg said "prepare to be assimilated; resistance is
futile" they were saying it to someone else. Here, it's someone inside the
activity telling it to be assimilated by an outside entity!
>Now what? == Part 1
> *Reconsider that our strongly held opinions might be wrong.
Start with your own opinions, George.
> *Allow for possibility
Allow that there are other possibilities to increase entertainment and
participation than surrendering 80 years of tradition and a separate
identity.
> *Share what is fabulous about corps
Fine, but it's what's fabulous about corps, not what's fabulous about
bands--even George wrote corps, not bands!
> *Look around. What would it be like to have 2000 people here and not
190?
George is referring to either the Midwestern Music Association or the
Midwest Band Directors Association, which had 2000 people. Actually, 190
was a good turnout! 500 would be OK. 2000 would be too much!
> *VOTE YES
No.
> *CHANGE THE WORLD
There are other ways to change the world!
>Thanks for your participation in the greatest unknown youth activity in the
world!
That's what my notes say, too. It's not what it says on the website now.
It now inserts 'for musicians' between 'activity' and 'musicians'.
IMHO, George should have started here, not ended here.
>Sadly submitted,
>
>Jackie
And I still think Hopkins is being a heretic to the ideals of drum corps and
a traitor to the activity!
Vince Lamb
"Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of RAMD? The Pollmaster knows!"
pete
"Sis" <sist...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:3E461880...@worldnet.att.net...
Forme2no101
elswhere) prelims to to cut the field down in the junior ranks!This was during
the era when corps kids would be thrown out of the marching band if
detected!DCI has hurt Drumcorps to the point it worries about its own
future,thank God marching bands are around so the "smart ones(?)" can move on
to them, and destroy all "mobil music" altogether.
Sis
>Since I was there, I may as well add my personal observations on this
>treasonous and heretical piece of propaganda
>
>
Better late than never! ;-) ;-) ;-)
Thanks, Vince.
Jackie
>
>
chucknaffier
First off, can we maybe more accurately represent the title of this thread?
I know, you didn't start it. . . but "uncovered" seems to imply there was a
cover-up. . . and that is certainly untrue. This has been above board the
whole way.
Anyway. . .
"Richard V. Lamb" <prof...@frontiernet.net> wrote in message
news:v4cj4kj...@corp.supernews.com...
> Since I was there, I may as well add my personal observations on this
> treasonous and heretical piece of propaganda.
>
> "Sis" <sist...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> news:3E460F1F...@worldnet.att.net...
> >From http://www.yea.org (for those of you who had trouble reading the
power
> point >presentation)
> >
> >At the DCI meetings in January, George Hopkins of YEA! made a 45 minute
> presentation >Setting the stage for the 10 rules proposals he had before
the
> body.
>
> George still doesn't seem to understand why Levi Boldt gave him a writing
> guide back in 1997!
What does this have to do with anything?
> > The presentation is only so telling without Hopkins to deliver verbal
> support, But, we thought >you might like to take a look. The basic
> premise -- Drum Corps has done itself harm through >separating from the
band
> world.
>
> Drum corps did quite well being separate from bands for the first 50+
years
> of its history, thank you. It was when drum corps and bands began
> approaching each other during the 1970s that drum corps began to suffer
from
> "shrinking pains."
Please tell us how bands and drum corps began to approach each other in the
1970's. It has always been my understanding that more corps folded in the
late 70's and early 80's due to financial strain than anything else.
> > As the band world has improved year after year, the corps world has
> maintained a rather elitist > attitude. Today, we sit with 700
participants
>
> 7000--even Hopkins himself said that many.
Goodness. This is a typo. . . nothing more.
> > and 300,000 fans nationwide.
>
> I was actually impressed to read that number--when a friend of mine who is
a
> marketer and I did a back of the envelope calculation on how big the
market
> for junior corps is, we came up with less than 100,000.
What is a back-of-the-envelope market analysis?
Is your method more accurate?
> >Meanwhile -- 2,000,000 young people march in bands!
>
> And how many people still alive *used* to go to shows but don't anymore?
> How many people used to go to shows in Quebec alone, but don't now because
> DCI (not the local show sponsor) pulled the plug on the Montreal show (the
> second oldest on the DCI tour after DCI Championships) because the big
boys
> didn't want to go there anymore?
Vince, the "big boys" were not the only ones who didn't want to go. It's
much the same reason that DCI Finals aren't out in California. There are
too few shows along the way to support a great number of corps financially
(show fees, etc.) to make it a viable option. As well, the hassles of
souvie trailers not being allowed to cross the border make this a financial
loss for most corps.
DCI did schedule around this show -- and a fine show it is/was -- but that
late in the season, and that far from any other shows, and with little
ability to generate souvie sales, what else should DCI have done? They
tried to schedule it earlier in the year but the idea did not resonate with
the show sponsor.
> >Drum corps is a great program for young people. It needs to be shared --
> But perhaps -- It >needs to be shared through pre-existing vehicles.
>
> Drum corps is a pre-existing vehicle!
Compared to?
So. . . this is where you shed your journalistic ethics and join the chorus
of bashers? If so, why wait 2 weeks. . . you were in the room. . . and you
didn't say anything? Shame on you.
> >The following is the power point presentation:
>
> Hopkins had some little difficulty getting his laptop to work, which
> prompted me to observe "Gee, George, if you can't handle a PowerPoint
> presentation, maybe you can't handle electronics!" :->
Holy tunnel-vision, Vince. . . why don't you tell the WHOLE truth. . . the
anit-virus software was on "auto" mode on his laptop, and it began to kick
in during the opening slide of the presentation.
> BTW, Hopkins knew that his speech would be controversial. Before he
started
> the presentation he said "If you don't like chocolate, then you won't like
> chocolate cake, you won't like chocolate pudding, and you won't like
> chocolate ice cream. If you don't like the opening of this talk, then you
> aren't going to like any of it-it's all chocolate!"
Yes he did say that. Is there some part of that analogy that is faulty?
> >Drum Corps Is Marching Band: Discussion of the Rules We Love To Hate
>
> I mentioned that George wrote his presentation backwards. That's because
he
> put the conclusion he wanted to reach first and his assumptions, goals,
and
> reasoning, such as it is, last or near the end. I think if his
assumptions
> and goals were placed first, there would be better lines of reasoning that
> would produce different conclusions!
So. . . can you give your version of how this should have gone please?
Seems like amplification passed. . .
> >Corps are Bands---YUCK!!!!!!
> > *We tell people we are not a band.
> > *We believe corps are better than bands.
> > *We grow up thinking and saying that bands sucks (sic)
>
> He described how, 25-30 years ago, almost none of the members of the
> Crossmen were also in bands, but now nearly every member of The Cadets was
> either in a high school or college band and that very few of them had
> marched another corps first. He also noted that insisting that a corps
was
> a band would likely get one beaten up. Guess what? It might still be
true,
> although we'll have to find legal, peaceful, non-violent ways to do the
> 'beating up.'
Well. . . I've been doing this for 24 years now. . . and I've never seen
anyone get beaten up for calling a corps a band. I heard stories from the
'50's and 60's from rather reputable sources. . . but is that really the
image we want? If so, I'd be the first one in line to change the name to
DBI.
> >Bands Get Better
> > *Bands hired our people.
>
> Because corps were better.
Yep. That was implied. You merely confirm.
> > *Bands bought our arrangements.
>
> Because corps had better arrangements for the field.
Yep. That was implied. You merely confirm.
> > *Bands went to our clinics.
>
> Because corps were better.
Yep. That was implied. You merely confirm.
> > *Bands hired our staff
>
> Redundant!
Indeed. . . because many of the drum corps instructors were already involved
with teaching band.
> > *Bands used their own talent to learn more and do more.
>
> Drum corps work ethic rubs off on bands!
Yep. That was implied. You merely confirm. But. . . are we the model
anymore now that they understand the work ethic?
> >Bands Become The PlayGround For Creativity
> > *Bands use amplification.
>
> Not a creative way to get loud.
Hmmm. . . maybe not YOUR creative way. . . but a solution none-the-less.
How exactly is "creativity" measured anyway? The root word "create" would
seem to indicate something other than what you espouse.
> > *Bands use electronics.
>
> Not a creative way to get sound effects. Which was more creative--SCV and
> Kiwanis Kavaliers producing the sound of a helicopter using drums or
playing
> a tape of a helicopter?
Certainly SCV was creative. . . Kiwanis was not. . . they copied. So have
200 marching bands. Not all amplified or electronically generated sounds
will be BETTER. Now, the question you might want to really ask here is, if
SCV had the choice at the time, would they have chosen a tape over the
approach they used?
Which is the bigger effect? Which is more impressive? Certainly SCV's
approach. Given that they were capable of creating that effect, and given
that percussion staffs are not stagnating in terms of trying to find the
next "new thing", I suggest they would have chosen to do it the way they did
it regardless of availability of taped helicopter sounds.
Regarding water sounds, or duplicating a human voice. . . which instrument
does that exactly? Rainsticks you say. . . so when is the last time you
heard a rainstick sound like it's supposed to from the top of the stadium?
Or is that the point. . . we can't make it happen the way it's currently set
up, so we ask for amplification.
> > *Bands utilize show themes.
>
> So do drum corps--theme shows have been in and out of fashion since 1970!
Marching bands were doing them before drum corps.
> > *Bands use dance --- and hire dance instructors.
>
> Corps have been dancing since 1971, if you cite SCV's Bottle Dance as the
> first, or the 1950s, if you pay attention to the Madison Scouts. However,
> if corps insist on dancing, hiring a dance instructor might actually be a
> good idea.
The level of dance proficiency being displayed by today's high school guards
OFTEN blows drum corps dancing out of the water. The Blue Devils, SCV and
Cadets of today are not the norm in the drum corps activity in the areas of
dance. Yes, years ago dance occurred in very limited instances. We're not
talking about the "existence" of dance. We're talking about maximizing the
use of effective moves. . .
So. . . yes, hiring a dance instructor might be a good idea.
> > *Bands use voiceovers.
>
> Empire Statesmen in DCA have used voice-overs before judging starts for
> years. Is there anything in the DCI rules that would prevent *that*?
Nothing is illegal before judging starts.
But you know that's not the point.
> > *Bands use costuming (they have money).
>
> Corps have used costuming since the Madison Scouts in 1970 (Alice in
> Wonderland show). As for the part about the money--as my favorite .sig of
> Levi Boldt's said: "Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most
> of the time he will pick himself up and continue." - Winston Churchill.
> Hey, George, have a nice trip. See you next fall!
Again, yes. Both corps and bands use costuming. But. . . bands are doing
it better than we are. . . and that was not always the case. The point. . .
as you pick apart each statement out of context is. . . that bands learned
from us, and then began to leave us in the dust creatively. Not ALL bands.
. . but the best bands. (And of course I speak of creativity, not
performance level).
> Gee, George, counting two of your points as two-parters, that's 1 out of 7
> (the second part of the second two-parter was a base on balls, an error,
or
> a hit batter, none of which count)--you're batting 0.143. That would get
> you sent down to the minors!
Pointless jabbing. Do you want to be taken seriously? Don't stoop. . .
> >Meanswhile, back at the farm
> > *We took 10 years to add a third valve
> > *We took 10 years to go to any key.
> > *We turned away from amplification, electronics, number proposals,
> indeed --- most any
> > proposal of any kind.
>
> In retrospect, George, frustrating you has turned out to be a *good*
thing!
How so? Point out where we saved drum corps by not adding a third valve,
any key, etc.
> > *We kept the name drum and bugle corps, even though we had no bugles.
>
> 1. According to the New Harvard Dictionary of Music, the two-valve G horns
> used in drum corps--even today--are bugles. If that dictionary had been
> revised since 1990, it would probably list the three-valve G horns as
> bugles, too. According to what is arguably the most authoritative source
of
> definitions in music, drum corps still has bugles!
Please read the numerous posts and information supplied by Jeff Mitchell.
We haven't played bugles in a very long time. . . just a hybrid.
> 2. If Hopkins wants to argue that the Bb/F brass that most of the top 12
in
> DCI are using are not bugles, fine, but Canadian and British corps have
been
> using Bb infantry bugles for more than 100 years--and I dare anyone to say
> that Scout House Alumni, who play on Bb brass, don't call their horns
> 'bugles'! Besides which, *Hopkins* were the one pushing for corps to use
> Bb/F brass. If he wants to say they're not bugles and cites the Harvard
> Dictionary of Music, he should remember that he and Dave Gibbs are to
blame
> for *that* state of affairs!
Your point? Do you want to keep saying bugles? Okay. Say it. The point
you keep plowing through in order to make your own points is that today's
drum corps looks nothing like the drum corps of 30 or 40 years ago. Getting
caught up in semantics is a pointless exercise in futiliy -- and will not
get you what you want. Say "drum & bugle corps" or whatever you like. . .
today is what it is.
> 3. If Hopkins is such a marketing 'genkus' then he should recognize the
> brand value in Drum Corps and understand that alone would drive us to keep
> the name!
There is no brand "value" in terms of marketing if the product is unknown.
> > *INDEED we reinforced the notion that what we do is good --- and not
to
> be compared to > the marching band world.
>
> About this point in his talk, Hopkins made a reference to how difficult it
> was to pick up the girls at "Hogs and Honeys", a bar near the hotel, by
> saying that he was with a drum corps. He said that if he told them he was
> with a marching band, they'd at least figure out he was a 'band geek' and
> know how to deal with him.
Vince. . . I saw you there too. How'd you do with the drum corps version?
:-)
> >AND ... as we won in our fight to be the same
>
> Actually, that fight was lost--junior drum corps does *not* look or sound
> the same today as in 1972, 1982, or even 1992, despite Hopkins' complaints
> of staleness and boredom!
Missed point. Not "the same as the past". . . the same as each other.
George is talking about trying to once again get seperate identities for
different drum corps.
> > *Our audience shrank
> > *BUFFALO 1990 30,000.
> > *BUFFALO 1995 25,000
> > *BUFFALO 2000 16,000 (sic)
>
> The next day, Larry Hershman of the Bluecoats noted that, with all the
Div.
> I corps playing at three focus shows (San Antonio, Indianapolis, and
> Allentown/Philadelphia) and other big events showcasing at least half the
> corps (Drums along the Rockies, Murfreesboro, and now DeKalb), 'finals'
had
> been brought to the fans and fewer fans actually needed to travel to
> championships. That has been DCI's spin on declining attendance. FWIW,
DCI
> seems to be OK with this, as the number of events they run has gone up,
> total attendance at DCI events has gone up, and DCI's revenue is up (DCI
has
> run a surplus for 3 years and has *no* long-term debt). Besides, lower
> finals attendance is *RAMD's* evidence that things are going wrong. Heh,
> George using our own reasoning against us!
Indeed, Larry is right. But our biggest showcase of the year is for the
diehards. . . the ones who will travel to a show. . . usually alum, friends
and family members. Walkup attendance to a DCI Finals is extremely limited.
But, the point to me seems to be not so much the declining attendance in
Buffalo over the course of 11 years, as some concern being shown for our
biggest showcase of the year being lightly attended. George thinks that a
better, more universally appealing product will draw larger crowds, which
certainly looks and sounds good on our audio and video products. As well,
it's a serious hype for the performers to play in front of a large crowd.
> > *Our # of corps shrank.
> > *The finances of the corps became precariously challenging.
>
> And amplification, electronics, saxophones, and 180 members wouldn't make
> both of those worse?
How so? George also said that any illusion of financial stability by ANY
corps is just that -- an illusion. There is no drum corps in the country
that is more than $50,000.00 away from folding. What would we rather do. .
. die by attrition or die actively pursuing a future?
> >BUT --- we protected the farm
>
> He was sarcastic about this.
Yep -- and made a pretty good point.
> > *The believers continue to extol the virtues of the institution
called
> drum and bugle corps.
>
> This is a *good* thing!
How so? What will be better about remaining the same as we are now? Heck,
Vince, most of the people on RAMD don't even like drum corps today. . . so
do we try to appease the group that will never be appeased, or do we move on
knowing nothing we do makes them happy anyway?
> > *The believers "scream for the heads" of those who seek something
> different.
>
> This is one of the places where he dissed the fans on the Internet. He
> mentioned death threats by email--after he smirked and rolled his eyes.
Well, Vince. . . when's the last time you received a death threat? RAMD is
not what it started life as. You, too, rolled your eyes and smirked when
you caught me in the hallway between sessions when we briefly mentioned
RAMD.
Fair is fair my friend.
> > *The leaders, having power within their autocratic rule, retreat to
the
> castle, where edicts can > be proclaimed. All is good they say.
> Change is bad.
>
> Here is where he tried to portray himself as a progressive and a
'democrat'.
> He mentioned that DCI was thinking of ceasing to have the Instructors
Summit
> and Tour Event Partners Seminar because of poor attendance--and he was
> saying it to an overflow crowd! Turns out he was right. Dan Acheson was
in
> favor of suspending it because DCI loses money on it. George argued in
> favor of keeping it. George got his way. For once, I'm glad he did!
Yep. . . this is a valuable time to exchange information, ideas, and a time
to get to know people you only see in passing out on tour.
A minor point. . . yes, the room was overflowing. . . but it was a VERY
small room. How many people attend Midwest Band & Orchestra Clinic? TBA?
etc. . .
> >Change Kept On A Comin'
> > *The economy of the activity changes.
>
> And YEA! is a leader in changing the economy of the activity!
How so? Explaing the mechanics of how YEA's financial decisions affect. . .
say. . . the Colts?
> > *School year change.
> > *Stadium use becomes an issue.
> > *Music changes.
> > *Technology changes.
> > *The interests of young people change
>
> Yeah, but does George really know *how* they've changed? I'm not
confident
> he does.
What do you mean? Are you saying that George's understanding of stadium
use, music changes, school year changes, technology changes and the
interests of young people would suddenly get us full corps on June 1st, get
us any stadium we want, suddenly appeal to a wider spectrum of youth? Would
a different understanding create new ways to put music by Boxcar Racer or
Saliva on the field?
> > *Society changes (Bowling Alone).
>
> George used this as a reason to give up on the past. He seemed to ignore
> the parts of the book about how youth and arts organizations can reverse
the
> trends he mentioned.
He's not talking about disbanding youth and arts organizations. Regardless
of whether people want to call it drum corps or not, he's actually endorsing
the idea that youth and arts organizations CAN reverse the trends. He's
looking at ways to appeal to a wider audience and affect MORE people.
> > *School music programs are challenged.
>
> Which Ken Mazur cites as a reason why drum corps should compete for
members
> with bands, not suck up to them (and it was one of the reasons for Phantom
> Regiments' rise to greatness in 1976--Rockford cut school music programs
and
> PR went from ~10th to ~4th. Ken just happened to have marched PR that
> year.)
Rockford, Illinois. Great. . . that means that Ken Mazur got to have a
great experience as one of only 128 members in the corps. How many other
THOUSANDS of kids just in Rockford no longer had an opportunity to change
their lives for the better?
See, this is what George is talking about. . . the narrow vision that some
drum corps people only think in terms of OUR activity, and not the greater
good.
> >AND DRUM CORPS STAYS THE SAME.
>
> Not strictly true.
You're right. . . it's not strictly true. But we change so slowly and so
inconsequentially that we look like we're standing still.
> >Falling further away from the times.
>
> That might not be a bad thing. The times today are terrible--ask Shawn
> Hines! (Sorry, couldn't resist! :-)
You know those are not the "times" to which he refers.
> >Moving All the Closer to the Cliff Called Inconsequential.
>
> And Hopkins (and Gibbs, and Cesario, and Downey) is the one leading junior
> corps there.
C'mon, Vince. Let's say those four guys retire tomorrow. . . where does
drum corps suddenly become "consequential"?
> >Drum Corps looks a bit like
> > *The Catholic Church
>
> The largest denomination in the US and one which is *growing*, according
to
> the latest survey in Scientific American, which has no sectarian axe to
> grind!
Indeed, recent trends in drum corps are the same (looks A BIT like). . .
yet. . . just like the Catholic Church, numbers are nowhere near the levels
of participation of the 1960's. So, the analogy stands.
> > *The Opera
>
> Also growing, according to National Public Radio, because it's able to
> attract young fans.
Cite the study.
> > *Brass Bands
>
> Drum corps should be that healthy and involved in the community.
A small niche that, in Colorado, has exactly 45 performers. Wow. . . that's
pretty "involved".
> > *The Mummers
>
> Stuart handled this one.
>
> >NOW WHAT?
>
> Steve Powers once told me that the best thing for junior drum corps would
be
> for both Scott Stewart and George Hopkins to leave the activity. One
down,
> one to go!
Your point?
> >BEGIN TODAY to define who we are
>
> Good idea.
>
> > and attach to another world
>
> Bad idea.
Staying seperate does not make drum corps grow. If you've got some ideas on
how to make drum corps grow -- well, you've certainly got your forum.
> > *CHOOSE ENTERTAINMENT
> > *LET PEOPLE IN
>
> Actually, I don't disagree with these goals. I just think there are
better
> ways to get there than giving up on drum corps' unique identity and 80
years
> of tradition.
What are those ways? What are your specific ideas? Why didn't you present
your concerns when it was question and answer time in that room in Orlando?
It was an open session.
> >Entertainment --- 180 people
>
> No, this is "let people in".
Yes, this is let people in. . . but this can be entertainment. . . more
people CAN equate to more options. . . doesn't have to. . . but it CAN. . .
> > *Allow for more options.
>
> George is bored.
Just because you don't understand his motivation doesn't mean he's bored.
> > *Guards grow.
>
> I disagree with George--30+ guard is enough. UCLA band had 225 musicians
> and 36 guard when I was the guard instructor and that was fine.
Opinion. . . which makes yours no more valid than his.
> > *More options in instrumentation.
> > *Effects can be bigger.
> > *Choices are more.
>
> George is bored.
Just because you don't understand his motivation doesn't mean he's bored.
> >Entertainment --- Amplification
> > *We can hear the pit.
>
> We can already hear the pit.
When's the last time you HEARD anything but suspended bass drum, suspended
cymbals, and brake drums when the brass line was playing at forte or higher?
Everyone talks about the Cavaliers now as the pit to emulate. . . yet it
wasn't so long ago that people were screaming that the Cavaliers horn line
didn't play above mezzoforte. . . so. . . have we figured out why the
Cavaliers pit cuts through so well yet?
> > *We can use instruments now not heard.
> > *We can use voices.
> > *We can dictate a story line (if we choose)
> > *People might actually come to understand what we are doing.
>
> Write simpler shows; they'll understand then.
So you're dictating now?
> >Entertainment --- The Encore
> > *How cool is this? The people like you and you let them have a
little
> more - Right away
> > *Kick in a "Jam"
> > *Play a fan favorite
>
> Pioneer already plays an encore. What's stopping the rest of the corps?
A drive-by musical moment is not the intent. Are you saying you would like
to hear an encore performance -- or are you just being argumentative?
> >Entertainment --- THE FREAKS
>
> He dissed us again here.
Deservedly so. And if people here weren't looking for every opportunity to
be offended. . . well. . . I'll stop that fantasy right here.
> > *Eliminating Warm-Ups is attached to playing while leaving.
> > *It will take a tad longer to get on......
> > *So perhaps a bit less banging and chord playing
> > *With a few exceptions
> > *Warm Ups are Warm Ups
>
> Blue Devils voted against this. :->
And?
> > *BORING!!!!
>
> I told you George was getting bored.
Just because you don't understand his motivation doesn't mean he's bored.
As well. . . George DID say that there are a couple of corps with
entertaining warmups. Why didn't you take that down in your notes?
> >Entertainment --- Length of Show
> > *We need the time to CRANK an audience.
> > *Extended phrases.
> > *Percussion solos
> > *Finishing a phrase.
> > *Playing a ballad Not on speed
>
> 1. This is actually a 'Back to the Future' proposal--corps used to play
> shows this long.
> 2. George finally admitted that competition mattered. He described how he
> timed corps and sometimes hoped that some would go overtime! FWIW, he
also
> admitted that he was once a socialist, but Dave Gibbs turned him into a
> Republican.
Wow. Remind me not to tell you any jokes.
> > 70 per cent of shows are longer than 11 minutes.
> > *50 per cent are ll:l5 or longer
> > *20 per cent are ll:30 or longer
>
> Wow, George actually used facts in a way that made sense. I'm impressed.
Do you think he's a stupid man? Why do you play to the lowest element on
RAMD?
> >Entertainment --- The Sidelines
> > *Do what you have to do
> > *Put stuff where you have to
> > *STOP WATCHING US!!!!!!!
>
> George doesn't like T&P and other restrictions. Neither, it seemed, did
> anyone else. This was passed unanimously by both instructors and
directors.
Yep.
> > *<the Sideline is still there --- you can just put stuff where it
needs
> to be to clear some room
>
> >Entertainment --- SAXES
> > *Ever heard a great sax solo?
> > *Ever heard a great sax quartet?
> > *Ever hear a big band without saxes?
>
> Yes, Stan Kenton had one with mellophoniums instead of saxes. One of the
> original arrangements of "Fanfare for the New" was for that band. It
kicked
> ass. Next!
In ADDITION to saxes. . . as well, I challenge anyone to sit and listen to
that whole album without drifting off to la-la land. . . other than
"Fanfare" (there is no "for the new" in the title) there is little
listenable on that album.
> > *Ever wonder what Tower of Power might sound (sic) within a corps
with
> saxes?
>
> No, because then it wouldn't be a corps. It would be a band!
That's your retort?
> >Entertainment --- GE Judges
> > *We need for the judge to see us the way the people see us
> > *Multiple exposures reduce the effect
> > *FRESH EYES AND EARS
>
> The judges really didn't like this proposal--nor did the rest of the task
> force on adjudication.
You are incorrect. The problem is that there are not enough judges
currently working in the ranks to make this a reality. The idea is not in
question -- the implementation of that idea is currently unworkable.
> >Entertainment --- Pull From the Hat
> > *Let the corps pick their poison (sic?)
> > *Lesson the politics
>
> 'And how many hours a day did you do lessons?' said Alice, in a hurry to
> change the subject.
>
> 'Ten hours the first day,' said the Mock Turtle: 'nine the next, and so
on.'
>
> 'What a curious plan!' exclaimed Alice.
>
> 'That's the reason they're called lessons,' the Gryphon remarked: 'because
> they lessen from day to day.'
I suppose this was supposed to be clever. If you resort to such tactics,
you'll be written off faster than you can say. . . pick a word. You want to
sound clever? Come up with real answers and find ways to implement them.
What's the old drum corps saying? "Those who can, do. Those who can't,
teach. Those who can't teach, judge. Those who can't judge, critique on
RAMD".
> > *Make it an event - a webcast
> > *Decrease the time spent working and wondering and influencing who is
> judging finals
>
> Gee, George, finally getting tired of that game?
So . . . everyone's opinion in life must be static?
> >LET PEOPLE IN --- Age
> > *6 months added
> > *Most kids are still in school
> > *Many more kids get a late start in corps
>
> Yadda, yadda, yadda--even though I was actually with him on this one.
Jesus, Vince. . . you really are just being as slanted as possible purpose?
> > *We can do more with seasoned members
>
> Bingo!
Is this a suprise? Tell me you didn't stand in the line at Northstar and
have to choose between a 19 year old soprano player and a 14 year old kid?
> >Let People in --- Saxes
> > *The door creaks open to band kids
>
> Brass, percussion, and guard in band are already in.
Yes. But that is not everyone is it? Interesting that the only way some of
us can feel better about our activity is to exclude others.
> > *A new constituency
>
> Yeah, 2 million band kids. Can you get them and still keep the old fans?
Not entirely. So do the math. . .
> > *Let's look to the best marching bands in the world
>
> Actually, George said "Let's become the best marching bands in the world"
> George is much better saying something than writing it out and he can
really
> work a room.
He said both. All you have to do is add some ww's and we WOULD be the best
marching bands in the world. Right now we're just the best marching brass
and percussion programs in the world. Why do you choose not to understand
plainly spoken words? Worse yet. . . why the hell weren't you saying
something in the room?
> > *Extreme Band
>
> Hey, Stuart--here's your "extreme marching"!
>
> > *A place to go --- a natural extension.
>
> That's fine. At the top level, junior corps is already there.
>
> >More on Saxes - Kind of?
> > *Vendors want to sell to bands.
>
> Follow the money. *One* drum sponsor gives DCI $20,000 a year--and DCI
has
> about 20 sponsors!
Okay. Don't follow the money. Watch what happens.
> > *2 million kids march in band
>
> And how many of them are sax players?
What is your point?
> > *We have 300,000 fans.
> > *We have 7,000 performers
>
> There are other ways to increase the number of performers than the ways
> George suggests.
Show us your plan.
> > *A NEW AUDIENCE
>
> New Coke! Yeah, that was a great success. :-/
Did you watch the show on the History Channel -- "Cola Wars"? You might
think differently about using that analogy.
> > WE ARE NOT DIFFERENT - WE ARE YOU
>
> At least when the Borg said "prepare to be assimilated; resistance is
> futile" they were saying it to someone else. Here, it's someone inside
the
> activity telling it to be assimilated by an outside entity!
Great. A Star Trek retort? This is useless. If you've got a real
argument, I'd suggest putting it forward now while you still have time. You
are wasting time with this approach. The days tick by. . .
> >Now what? == Part 1
> > *Reconsider that our strongly held opinions might be wrong.
>
> Start with your own opinions, George.
What duplicity? (sarcasm off)
> > *Allow for possibility
>
> Allow that there are other possibilities to increase entertainment and
> participation than surrendering 80 years of tradition and a separate
> identity.
You know. . . I've yet to see the proposals you speak of.
> > *Share what is fabulous about corps
>
> Fine, but it's what's fabulous about corps, not what's fabulous about
> bands--even George wrote corps, not bands!
What?
> > *Look around. What would it be like to have 2000 people here and not
> 190?
>
> George is referring to either the Midwestern Music Association or the
> Midwest Band Directors Association, which had 2000 people. Actually, 190
> was a good turnout! 500 would be OK. 2000 would be too much!
You miss the point. 2000 would not be too many -- it would be an indication
of a healthy activity. What kind of subjective idiocy says any specific
number is "too many" when it comes to drum corps???
> > *VOTE YES
>
> No.
Your choice.
> > *CHANGE THE WORLD
>
> There are other ways to change the world!
And these are? You're a broken record, Vince. . . and it's getting late.
> >Thanks for your participation in the greatest unknown youth activity in
the
> world!
>
> That's what my notes say, too. It's not what it says on the website now.
> It now inserts 'for musicians' between 'activity' and 'musicians'.
And?
> IMHO, George should have started here, not ended here.
>
> >Sadly submitted,
> >
> >Jackie
>
> And I still think Hopkins is being a heretic to the ideals of drum corps
and
> a traitor to the activity!
If that's the best you can do, then you will be run over like a quarter on
the train tracks.
You know, I don't support all the proposals -- and you can Google on
chuckn...@attbi.com to see that this is true. But I wince when I see
such thin logic, lack of alternatives presented, and such inaccuracies and
pettiness in your arguments. You will FAIL miserably if these are your best
tactics.
You might still have time. . . but the clock is ticking. . . the best thing
about drum corps fans is their passion. The worst thing about drum corps
fans is that their passion too often interferes with clear thinking when
trying to achieve objectives.
Chuck Naffier
Sis
>Hi Vince,
>
>First off, can we maybe more accurately represent the title of this thread?
>I know, you didn't start it. . . but "uncovered" seems to imply there was a
>cover-up. . . and that is certainly untrue. This has been above board the
>whole way.
>
>Anyway. . .
>
>
Hi Chuck,
I started the thread and I took the title DIRECTLY from the YEA! org.
page on the subject. I didn't change a thing.
Your beef may be with them and not us! ;-)
Jackie
>
>
Sis
Steve Spang
> Drum corps did quite well being separate from bands for the first 50+ years
> of its history, thank you. It was when drum corps and bands began
> approaching each other during the 1970s that drum corps began to suffer from
> "shrinking pains."
Thanx for understanding, Vince.
Corps is corps, and band is band (as we used to say). Do we just flap our lips
in the wind here? Or, does anyone really listen...
I've tried writing to George a few times expressing my views... no response...
I'm one of the many who marched during the 'glory days' of corps (60's) and
never achieved any major claim to fame (personally). I still participate.
Does that make my input any less valid, or, is this man just a deaf-mute who
can't read or write?
--
Steve
Steve Spang
> I started the thread and I took the title DIRECTLY from the YEA! org.
> page on the subject. I didn't change a thing.
>
> Your beef may be with them and not us! ;-)
Go!
--
Steve
chucknaffier
Not a problem. . . I did not know where the title came from. . .
Thanks for the clarification.
Chuck
"Sis" <sist...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:3E46B606...@worldnet.att.net...
Steve B
> >I got into drum corps through the Catholic Church. How dare he pick on a
> >religion. Did anyone ask him what he meant by this?
>
>
> Especially since drum corps is not under fire for child molesting.
Last time I checked the Catholic church wasn't under fire for child
molesting either. A few bad priests and a coverup, yes. But to
indite the whole religion...bullshit!!
Steve Burstall
"And now these three remain: faith, hope, and love. But the greatest
of these is love." - 1 Corinthians 13:13
Have Fun, Make Money, Make a Difference: Team of Destiny
guest passcode: 3014998 <~ note change
Steve Spang
> Last time I checked the Catholic church wasn't under fire for child
> molesting either. A few bad priests and a coverup, yes. But to
> indite the whole religion...bullshit!!
CYO used to support some of THE best corps and one of the best shows ever... CYO Nat's. Remembering when...
--
Steve
Big Rich Soprano
>Last time I checked the Catholic church wasn't under fire for child
>molesting either. A few bad priests and a coverup, yes. But to
>indite the whole religion...bullshit!!
Well without continuing this any further....
The church is made up of what.... priests.
The church moved who around after they were found out....... priests.
the church is as guilty as who.......priests.
This is where it ends. Beat up on Hoppy TSP not me.
To do is to be - Descartes
To be is to do - Voltaire
Do be do be do - Sinatra
Catherine
> Hi Vince,
>
> First off, can we maybe more accurately represent
> the title of this thread?
Already settled by Jackie as YEA's title.
> I know, you didn't start it. . . but "uncovered" seems
> to imply there was a cover-up. . . and that is certainly
> untrue. This has been above board the whole way.
HEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE.......
. . .
. . .
. . .
K...
Really "funny", Chuck. Yer a real card...
> Anyway. . .
>
> "Richard V. Lamb" <prof...@frontiernet.net> wrote in message
> news:v4cj4kj...@corp.supernews.com...
> > Since I was there, I may as well add my
> > personal observations on this treasonous and
> > heretical piece of propaganda.
Whatever sells DCW issues, eh "RAMD's expert on RAMD"?
> > "Sis" <sist...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> > news:3E460F1F...@worldnet.att.net...
> > >From http://www.yea.org (for those of you who
> > >had trouble reading the power point presentation)
> > >
> > >At the DCI meetings in January, George Hopkins of
> > >YEA! made a 45 minute presentation Setting the stage
> > >for the 10 rules proposals he had before the body.
> >
> > George still doesn't seem to understand why Levi Boldt
> > gave him a writing guide back in 1997!
Well, I still remember Levi Boldt...
> What does this have to do with anything?
There ya go, Chuck... Ask the RAMD's Expert on RAMD, you'll get a
RAMD "answer" - not that Vince will be asked for "proof" by George
Dixon, get called a chickenshit by Ron Allard, and get flamed by a
succession of Cadet apologist screen names...
> > > The presentation is only so telling without Hopkins
> > > to deliver verbal support,
Yep - harder to sell snake oil over the Internet. One needs other
"techniques" and minions for that... Saving the gods of all time
"personal touch" for more privileged targets, eh?
> > > But, we thought you might like to take a look. The
> > > basic premise
"How to Rule the World", er...
> > > -- Drum Corps has done itself harm through
trusting the history and assets of drum & bugle corps to mediocrities,
er...
> > > separating from the band world.
HEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE.......
. . .
. . .
. . .
K...
Sounds like Plawner is writing comedy relief for George's proposals...
Coincidence, I am sure...
> > Drum corps did quite well being separate from bands
> > for the first 50+ years of its history, thank you.
Well, that was prolly because it was a DAMNED good idea. But that
doesn't allow for "innovation" or paid/consulting innovators or
"maximizing the possibilities" for "clever" people, now does it? And
we can't have that - even if it means a healthy drum & bugle corps
activity servicing 1000s of kids, formally musically-educated or not -
now can we?
> > It was when drum corps and bands began approaching
> > each other
All by themselves... NO ONE was responsible... ("Funny" all those
resume credits then...)
> > during the 1970s that drum corps began to suffer
> > from "shrinking pains."
SHEESH!!! And all this time I thought that DCI has been SO
successful, wonderful, state-of-the-art, best ever <insert ad
infinitum BS marketing claims here>...
> Please tell us how bands and drum corps began to approach
> each other in the 1970's. It has always been my
> understanding that more corps folded in the late 70's and
> early 80's due to financial strain than anything else.
>
> > As the band world has improved year after year, the
DCI bando
> > corps world has maintained a rather elitist attitude.
Once again, nothing substantive that caused all those corps to fold.
Ahhh, drum & bugle corps' "elitist attitude" - THAT's a good
"explanation" to try... <burrrrrrrrrrp>
> > Today, we sit with 700 participants
> >
> > 7000--even Hopkins himself said that many.
>
> Goodness. This is a typo. . . nothing more.
That's OK - we're used to fluctuating stats, when we get them at
all... 'Twould be interesting to see the footnotes on this speech
anyway...
> > > and 300,000 fans nationwide.
> >
> > I was actually impressed to read that number--when a
> > friend of mine
Ah, the "friend" of mine...
> > who is a marketer
George Hopkins?
> > and I did a back of the envelope calculation on how big
> > the market for junior corps is, we came up with less
> > than 100,000.
That used to be the combined audiences and corpsmembers in some single
states (just an estimation given numbers of corps, parents, friends,
5,000 in each town...). (I know, "things" have changed... like junior
drum & bugle corps "product" and the quality of the people therein...)
> What is a back-of-the-envelope market analysis?
> Is your method more accurate?
<tee> Prolly.
> > >Meanwhile -- 2,000,000 young people march in bands!
> >
> > And how many people still alive *used* to go to shows
> > but don't anymore? How many people used to go to
> > shows in Quebec alone, but don't now because DCI (not
> > the local show sponsor) pulled the plug on the
> > Montreal show (the second oldest on the DCI tour
> > after DCI Championships) because the big boys didn't
> > want to go there anymore?
>
> Vince, the "big boys" were not the only ones who didn't
> want to go. It's much the same reason that DCI Finals
> aren't out in California. There are too few shows
> along the way to support a great number of corps
> financially (show fees, etc.) to make it a viable option.
> As well, the hassles of souvie trailers not being
> allowed to cross the border make this a financial
> loss for most corps.
Apples and oranges. Tour in Montreal, or Orlando or Birmingham in the
summertime? Howzabout what the members would like, since it's all
about the kids, eh? See, Chuck, there USED ta be quite a number of
great bugle bands and corps in Canada. Then the public funds dried
up, and the cost of those semis, food trucks and souvie trailers...
But good thing all the corps can still drive that short distance to
Orlando from California, the "drum corps capital"... Oh, that's
right; drum corps = marching band <$1 to Hopkins/YEA>.
> DCI did schedule around this show -- and a fine show it
> is/was -- but that late in the season, and that far from
> any other shows, and with little ability to generate
> souvie sales, what else should DCI have done?
Increase souvie sales by having a saleable product and 100s of corps
and corpspeople interested in buying, rather than an activity in which
televising full shows is deemed too boring? "Funny" that all those
3,000,000 marching band kids don't just snap up them corps souvies
today - mebbe send the souvie trailers to band shows?
> They tried to schedule it earlier in the year but
> the idea did not resonate with the show sponsor.
Hmmmmmm... "Resonate"... There's a precise term... <not>.
Howzabout having a "product" connected to known neighborhood
organizations with connected,
respected-by-achieving-and-not-bando-wannabes people? Like decades of
alumni one has honored in an activity such alumni networks are proud
to continue supporting and working for?
> > >Drum corps is a great program for young people.
> > >It needs to be shared -- But perhaps -- It needs
> > >to be shared through pre-existing vehicles.
Like being connected to known neighborhood organizations with
connected, respected-by-achieving-and-not-bando-wannabes people?
(Ditto above.)
> > Drum corps is a pre-existing vehicle!
>
> Compared to?
Drum & bugle corps that's connected... <ditto above>
> > >Perhaps not all have to come around to the
YEA
> > >corps way of thinking. Enjoy the presentation --
> > >It will only be up for a short time
> > Thanks to Google (and Jackie 'Sis' Fritsche) it will
> > be up as long as Google is. Thanks Jackie!
YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA - and as long as personal e-mail archives and any
subsequent books and other materials exist - as what NOT to do.
> > >-- But -- For those avid visitors to www.yea.org, we
> > >thought it might be of some interest. If comment is
> > >necessary, you can write to Hopkins at hop...@yea.org.
Better. I just wrote to the NJ Governor's office. Good thing only
EVERYONE is interested in my posts...
> > Comment here is just fine. IMHO, any attempt to write
> > to Hopkins will just result in an attempt to sell
> > you on his plan.
REALLY? That might be fun...
> > Unless you want that, don't bother.
No shit.
> > The most you can do is either annoy him, confirm to him
> > that we're all Neanderthals, or amuse him with what he
> > perceives as your 'ignorant, anti-progressive attitude'.
That's "negitive"... <$1 to another Cadets apologist troll...>
Besides, you could wind up on a viral-laden e-list.
> > Most of the times he was badmouthing us, he was smirking.
Been there, done that. It's all that respect, moral dignity and
excellence I keep hearing about...
> > It took me a few days to figure it out, but I realized he
> > looked as if he were either laughing at us, getting off
> > on being the center of our attention, or both.
Yep. Add an occasion to bash the freaks and zombies later to his
"friends", given the ready promulgation of those terms by
professionals/YEA BoD members...
> > That realization infuriated me. I have some ideas on
> > how to wipe that smirk off his face.
<nonviolence disclaimers>
> > If you're interesting in helping me do that, email me.
Sorry, Vince. But good luck on yer "projects"... I'd hate to get on
yet another viral laden e-list, or otherwise waste my time.
> So. . . this is where you shed your journalistic ethics
> and join the chorus of bashers? If so, why wait 2 weeks. . .
> you were in the room. . . and you didn't say anything?
> Shame on you.
Agreed. This has been the inevitable goal for years now. George
didn't start smirking yesterday... Why, just last December he
responded to an e-mail from Jim Elvord (copied to some VERY
interesting names) saying he'd never heard of me. And then here comes
Father Reilly, Mr. Drapkin to assure us of their sincere intentions
for us RAMD "freaks"... Some real excellence there... <not>
> > >The following is the power point presentation:
> >
> > Hopkins had some little difficulty getting his laptop
> > to work, which prompted me to observe "Gee, George,
> > if you can't handle a PowerPoint presentation, maybe
> > you can't handle electronics!" :->
He's a leader in charge of making these best decisions on behalf of
all of us and the activity we've loved for decades, for the future of
all those kids out there - not a mere marching member and player about
whom "this is all about"...
> Holy tunnel-vision, Vince. . . why don't you tell the
> WHOLE truth. . . the anit-virus software was on "auto"
> mode on his laptop, and it began to kick in during
> the opening slide of the presentation.
<tee> Those darned viruses all over this flourishing activity...
> > BTW, Hopkins knew that his speech would be
> > controversial. Before he started the
> > presentation he said "If you don't like
> > chocolate, then you won't like chocolate cake,
> > you won't like chocolate pudding, and you won't
> > like chocolate ice cream. If you don't like the
> > opening of this talk, then you aren't going to
> > like any of it-it's all chocolate!"
And Michael Cesario LUVS chocolate...
> Yes he did say that. Is there some part of that
> analogy that is faulty?
Good thing I've always preferred vanilla and butter pecan... Good
objection, Chuck - go for the validity-of-the-analogy dodge, as though
the quality of the analogy is the obvious point being made...
<OP - bored now...>
<MASS SNIPPAGE>
-- Catherine
chucknaffier
I haven't read your commentary below, though I'm certain you'll read mine.
Vince and I were in the same room.
We both heard the same presentation.
You were not there.
Feel free to comment on something you know anything about.
You have no expertise here, regardless of what your ego says otherwise.
Goodnight Gracie,
Chuck Naffier
"Catherine" <cather...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:93e9a2e7.03020...@posting.google.com...
Jeff Ream
so, by the comment you made, you're bagging on your own corps.
or did you change the words to "For Holy Name shall never be"?
>Subject: "Drum Corps looks a bit like the Catholic Church"
>From: Sis sist...@worldnet.att.net
>Date: 2/9/2003 3:55 AM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <3E461880...@worldnet.att.net>
>
>
>--------------090103050900070908010808
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>--------------090103050900070908010808
>Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
><head> <title></title></head>Hopkins powerpointed out:
><blockquote type="cite" cite="mid3E460F...@worldnet.att.net">
><title></title>
> Drum Corps looks a bit like
> *The Catholic Church
> </blockquote>If Drum Corps looks a bit like the Catholic
>Church.....
>Then Hopkins looks a bit like ________________
>
>
>fill in the blank.
>
>Jackie
>
>
>
>--------------090103050900070908010808--
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Jeff Ream
"I'm the drummer your guard captain warned you about"
Jeff Ream
do your damn research better eh?
>AND ... as we won in our fight to be the same
>> *Our audience shrank
>> *BUFFALO 1990 30,000.
>> *BUFFALO 1995 25,000
>> *BUFFALO 2000 16,000 (sic)
>
sgordon
not just change drumcorps into football? I mean, they already
hold the shows on the field... why not just send two corps in
at once, have them play football, with the guard as cheerleaders.
Popularity would skyrocket!
Once again I am reminded of bagpipes and drums... it remains
heavily immersed in its tradition, and enjoys greater popularity
than drumcorps... in fact, probably greater popularity in America
than drumcorps does. Now, if you went to a bagpipe and drums
competition, and you saw standard marching bands with singers,
and 20th century music, and electric guitars, would you be just
a bit disappointed?
Drumcorps is what it is. Even if by changing it you do make
it popular doesn't mean you've made drumcorps popular. If you
don't like drumcorps anymore, that's fine. But some of us do
still enjoy drumcorps, so please don't change it and make it go away.
Scott
MC
I'm glad Mr. Hopkins has finally stated YEA's true position.
For the last six years he and the YEA org have attempted to claim
the changes they want would "still be drum corps", using incredibly
fuzzy logic like "the gear doesn't matter" and other equally hollow
rhetoric.
Sadly, some members and fans bought it, hook line and sinker, or
supported the gibberish in order to hype the real agenda, spelled
out in the presentation at hand.
Glad to see the rabbit is finally out of the hat and on the table.
Having said that, I have to wonder why the activity as a whole
looks to these people for leadership when it's clear these folks
no longer believe in the product they're being paid to produce.
If drum corps was really a business, like the soft drink industry,
these folks would be out of jobs. If they made a presentation
to the BOD suggesting the product [Dr. Pepper] won't sell and
can't really be marketed unless it tastes and looks exactly like
another product [Coke], they'd be gone before the meeting was over.
The BOD would thank them for their input, send them off to pack up
their offices, and start a search for replacements who believe in
their product and could market it. End of story. Apparently drum
corps is not a business.
If drum corps is the Catholic Church, as the presentation states,
then a number of the Cardinals [not just Monsignor Hopkins] have
completely lost their faith. It's clear they need to go join the
church they believe in, the sooner the better.
Since most are big fans of change in a stagnant activity, surely
they can appreciate how stagnant their own presence has been in
leadership roles over the last 20 - 25 years.
Here's to seeing that faith in action.
Regards,
Michael Cahill
[in the back, pew 87]
chucknaffier
"sgordon" <sgo...@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:u3H1a.65322$Ik.27...@typhoon.sonic.net...
> If the goal is to increase participation at all costs, why
> not just change drumcorps into football? I mean, they already
> hold the shows on the field... why not just send two corps in
> at once, have them play football, with the guard as cheerleaders.
> Popularity would skyrocket!
Ahhh. . . 1980 Bridgemen. . .
> Once again I am reminded of bagpipes and drums... it remains
> heavily immersed in its tradition, and enjoys greater popularity
> than drumcorps... in fact, probably greater popularity in America
> than drumcorps does. Now, if you went to a bagpipe and drums
> competition, and you saw standard marching bands with singers,
> and 20th century music, and electric guitars, would you be just
> a bit disappointed?
So. . . doesn't it concern you that bagpipes and drums are more popular? I
don't know that particular activity myself, but would you care to pass along
specifics regarding participation numbers, etc.?
> Drumcorps is what it is. Even if by changing it you do make
> it popular doesn't mean you've made drumcorps popular. If you
> don't like drumcorps anymore, that's fine. But some of us do
> still enjoy drumcorps, so please don't change it and make it go away.
Which era of drum corps do you like? Do you like today's drum corps? The
2002 season?
Chuck Naffier
> Scott
>
chucknaffier
*snip of intro*
> Having said that, I have to wonder why the activity as a whole
> looks to these people for leadership when it's clear these folks
> no longer believe in the product they're being paid to produce.
You imply that there is only one way to produce the "product". Surely all
of drum corps history shows that to be false.
> If drum corps was really a business, like the soft drink industry,
> these folks would be out of jobs. If they made a presentation
> to the BOD suggesting the product [Dr. Pepper] won't sell and
> can't really be marketed unless it tastes and looks exactly like
> another product [Coke], they'd be gone before the meeting was over.
If drum corps was like the soft drink industry, then BOA and DCI would have
merged already. Who do you think owns Dr. Pepper?
> The BOD would thank them for their input, send them off to pack up
> their offices, and start a search for replacements who believe in
> their product and could market it. End of story. Apparently drum
> corps is not a business.
You are correct. Drum corps is not a business.
> If drum corps is the Catholic Church, as the presentation states,
You are incorrect. The words are "a bit like the Catholic Church". . . and
not in the ways you suggest. Had you been in the room you would have heard
the reasoning. Don't make things up.
> then a number of the Cardinals [not just Monsignor Hopkins] have
> completely lost their faith. It's clear they need to go join the
> church they believe in, the sooner the better.
Seems they are already going that way. Perhaps in your haste to give them
the bum's rush you hasten the death of that which you like.
> Since most are big fans of change in a stagnant activity, surely
> they can appreciate how stagnant their own presence has been in
> leadership roles over the last 20 - 25 years.
Okay, Michael. I hereby give my job to you. You are the new Crossmen brass
arranger. Congratulations. Good luck.
Chuck Naffier
Son of a Preacher Man
MC
chucknaffier wrote:
> So. . . doesn't it concern you that bagpipes and drums are more popular?
It should concern the folks who keep telling us change and
instrument additions are necessary to keep drum corps alive.
Even with MTV, Xbox, and WWE . . . pipe bands still draw
members and audiences with none of the radical proposals and
changes DCI has adopted or claimed necessary.
> I don't know that particular activity myself, but would you
> care to pass along specifics regarding participation numbers,
> etc.?
Worldwide - 3000 - 4000 pipe bands at all levels of skill.
Truly international - bands come from all over the globe.
212 Units were at the 2002 World Championships in Glasgow, Scotland.
Has it's own weekly radio broadcast on BBC.
Maxville Ont. hosts the North American Championship, they
estimated 80,000 paying customers at the games over a two
day period last season.
Not sure on attendance numbers at the World Championships.
Regards,
Michael Cahill
MC
chucknaffier wrote:
> You imply that there is only one way to produce the "product".
No, that would be your assumption. Perhaps an analogy would help.
The product [a car] can have many different models [makes].
The product [drum corps] can have many different models [corps].
At some point, if you add enough size, weight, storage etc.,
the car becomes a truck. At this point the product has changed.
At some point, if you add enough instruments, members, gear,
the drum corps becomes a marching band. At this point the
product has changed.
For some folks it was Bb, others will draw the line at amps,
almost no one with any honesty about the issue will disagree
when it hits woodwinds and electronics.
> Surely all of drum corps history shows that to be false.
We can all differentiate between the drum corps product and
the marching band product if we look at the issue factually
rather than rhetorically.
See analogy above.
> If drum corps was like the soft drink industry, then BOA and
> DCI would have merged already. Who do you think owns Dr. Pepper?
Companies merging does not = product duplication.
Does Dr. Pepper taste like Coke?
> You are correct. Drum corps is not a business.
That's not what I hear from the guys in DCI and on staff.
>>If drum corps is the Catholic Church, as the presentation states,
>
> You are incorrect. The words are "a bit like the Catholic Church". . .
> and not in the ways you suggest. Had you been in the room you would
> have heard the reasoning. Don't make things up.
What did I make up? He compared DCI to the Catholic Church.
Sorry for leaving out "a bit" or "like", but the point still
stands. The brothers have lost the faith, "a bit" like the
leaders of the Catholic Church.
They're also "a bit" similar in that neither leadership
listens to the folks in the pews or the in house members
when it comes to changes in the church.
As for being there, why don't you tell us what was said?
You were there, so share.
> Seems they are already going that way.
Great. I wish them the best of luck in the MB world, and
thank them for their contributions over the years.
> Perhaps in your haste to give them the bum's rush you
> hasten the death of that which you like.
So now drum corps dies if "The Cardinals" leave? That's a new
form of blackmail.
Ok, assuming that is true, what's the difference? If they stay,
drum corps becomes marching band and is dead anyway.
> Okay, Michael. I hereby give my job to you. You are the new
> Crossmen brass arranger. Congratulations. Good luck.
That's too bad. You're a great arranger. But if your view
is that drum corps is not a viable product, it might be
best for you to head to what you really believe in.
Ok, we need to place an order for some G bugles and I'll
need to call some brass guys who will actually know how to
arrange and run a brassline, me being a drummer and all.
Cheers,
Michael Cahill
sgordon
: chucknaffier wrote:
:> So. . . doesn't it concern you that bagpipes and drums are more popular?
Chuck asked a question while never bothering to answer mine.
But anyhow, Mike wrote:
: Maxville Ont. hosts the North American Championship, they
: estimated 80,000 paying customers at the games over a two
: day period last season.
And it remains deeply immersed in its own traditions. The repetoires
are startlingly consistent (the arrangements change), the programming
is governed by very specific rules (much like drum corps was in the
1950s and 1960s at the height of its popularity). Point is, when you
go to a pipe/drums show, you know what to expect, and you go because
you want to see THAT, not opera or poetry or performance art, which you
saw last weekend and now you want to see something else.
Pipes and drum corps share one thing in common... a unique, stirring
sound. That sound is being diluted in drum corps, in an attempt to
make it more like something else that certain powers-that-be are
convinced is better (orchestra, band, wind ensemble, take your pick).
Imagine what would happen to pipes popularity if they morped into the
current version of drumcorps, with modern dance, electronics, and
unrecognizable music. People would stop going, and just stay home and
listen to their records when they wanted to listen to the pipes.
Scott
Sis
>
>
> chucknaffier wrote:
>
>> So. . . doesn't it concern you that bagpipes and drums are more popular?
>
>
> It should concern the folks who keep telling us change and
> instrument additions are necessary to keep drum corps alive.
>
> Even with MTV, Xbox, and WWE . . . pipe bands still draw
> members and audiences with none of the radical proposals and
> changes DCI has adopted or claimed necessary.
>
Michael,
I would venture a guess that the Directors of that pipe band
organization have not changed their activity to anything else than the
pipe band activity that they love and thereby have not destroyed their
activity from within.
Vince was correct when he called it treason. It is an act of deliberate
betrayal and disloyalty to the activity. It is subversive to drum
corps, overthrowing drum corps from within.
Jackie
Sis
> <snip>
>
> Great. I wish them the best of luck in the MB world, and
> thank them for their contributions over the years.
>
>> Perhaps in your haste to give them the bum's rush you
>
> > hasten the death of that which you like.
>
> So now drum corps dies if "The Cardinals" leave? That's a new
> form of blackmail.
>
> Ok, assuming that is true, what's the difference? If they stay,
> drum corps becomes marching band and is dead anyway.
>
I totally agree.
Jackie
Levi Boldt
>> George still doesn't seem to understand why Levi Boldt gave him a writing
>> guide back in 1997!
> What does this have to do with anything?
Good question, Chuck. I thought it was just a funny gag gift... almost
worth lugging the thing around on tour until we had a show with the
Cadets!
>> Corps have used costuming since the Madison Scouts in 1970 (Alice in
>> Wonderland show). As for the part about the money--as my favorite .sig of
>> Levi Boldt's said: "Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most
>> of the time he will pick himself up and continue." - Winston Churchill.
>> Hey, George, have a nice trip. See you next fall!
I detect a trend. Gee Vince, if you're gonna name-drop wouldn't you want
to do that with an established and universally respected name, not just
some schmuck that had way too much free time on his hands when he was in
college?
--
Levi Boldt
chucknaffier
My apologies for not answering your question. It was unintentional.
"sgordon" <sgo...@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:u3H1a.65322$Ik.27...@typhoon.sonic.net...
> If the goal is to increase participation at all costs, why
> not just change drumcorps into football?
Because we don't play football.
> I mean, they already
> hold the shows on the field... why not just send two corps in
> at once, have them play football, with the guard as cheerleaders.
> Popularity would skyrocket!
>
> Once again I am reminded of bagpipes and drums... it remains
> heavily immersed in its tradition, and enjoys greater popularity
> than drumcorps... in fact, probably greater popularity in America
> than drumcorps does. Now, if you went to a bagpipe and drums
> competition, and you saw standard marching bands with singers,
> and 20th century music, and electric guitars, would you be just
> a bit disappointed?
Well, first off I wouldn't go to a pipe band event.
But. . . sure I'd be disappointed. But I wouldn't live on a newsgroup
complaining about it like several here (not you, Scott -- just making a
point.) I'd find something else to do.
Another question: Have pipe bands always existed as they currently do? Was
there a starting point that is different than what you see now?
Who knows, maybe I'll become a pipe band fan. . . so. . . at least thanks
for the information.
Chuck
chucknaffier
You live!
Email me and catch up a little when you get the chance --
Still got that ageout picture of you and me at Camp Randall sitting on my
desk!
:-)
Chuck
"Levi Boldt" <bold...@pilot.msu.edu> wrote in message
news:3E47F39B...@pilot.msu.edu...
Stuart Rice
> "Richard V. Lamb" <prof...@frontiernet.net> wrote in message
> news:v4cj4kj...@corp.supernews.com...
> > "Sis" <sist...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> > news:3E460F1F...@worldnet.att.net...
> > >From http://www.yea.org (for those of you who had trouble reading the
> > >power point >presentation)
> > > The presentation is only so telling without Hopkins to deliver verbal
> > support, But, we thought >you might like to take a look. The basic
> > premise -- Drum Corps has done itself harm through >separating from the
> band
> > world.
> >
> > Drum corps did quite well being separate from bands for the first 50+
> years
> > of its history, thank you. It was when drum corps and bands began
> > approaching each other during the 1970s that drum corps began to suffer
> from
> > "shrinking pains."
>
>
> Please tell us how bands and drum corps began to approach each other in the
> 1970's.
I'll field this - they began to recognize each other's markets. Bands
moved more toward corps because they developed an appreciation of the
art which they had yet to discover - choreographed marching. Along
with drumming/guard techniques (which most band directors finally
recognized as surpassing their own in most respects), they also
recognized that bugles were providing a superior sound outdoors (a
fact too few of us recognize today). They strove to immitate it
through the 70s and 80s - maybe the 90s - with no small amount of
frustration. Kind of the same problem they confronted when developing
the concert band - orchestras where the state of the art concert
sound, but how to achieve that kind of blend and balance was and is
the problem for instrumentation originally designed to pull double
duty (indoor and outdoor).
> It has always been my understanding that more corps folded in the
> late 70's and early 80's due to financial strain than anything else.
I think it began earlier in the 70s. I think we could find the seeds
(over-touring and lack of restrictions for regional entrants) being
planted in the 60s, in fact.
> > > and 300,000 fans nationwide.
> >
> > I was actually impressed to read that number--when a friend of mine who is
> > a marketer and I did a back of the envelope calculation on how big the
> > market for junior corps is, we came up with less than 100,000.
>
>
> What is a back-of-the-envelope market analysis?
> Is your method more accurate?
If you appreciate the juvenile logic which Hopkins' proposal is
founded on, you can appreciate the fact that its at least an argument
(and likely a better one, considering the credentials). 'He just
means he feels better about your guesses than some people's facts'
(Dr. McCoy to Spock, Re: a comment of Captain Kirk in Star Trek III or
IV)
> > >Meanwhile -- 2,000,000 young people march in bands!
> >
> > And how many people still alive *used* to go to shows but don't anymore?
> > How many people used to go to shows in Quebec alone, but don't now because
> > DCI (not the local show sponsor) pulled the plug on the Montreal show (the
> > second oldest on the DCI tour after DCI Championships) because the big
> > boys didn't want to go there anymore?
How many drum corps kids got sucked into band culture once drum corps
musicianship began to approach that taught in public schools?
> > >Drum corps is a great program for young people. It needs to be shared --
> > But perhaps -- It >needs to be shared through pre-existing vehicles.
> >
> > Drum corps is a pre-existing vehicle!
>
> Compared to?
I think we need to be explicit about what is required to "share" it
before we worry about organizations. All-too-common problem -
worrying about organizations before ideals. Cart before horse.
> >[re: wiping Hopkins' smirk off his face] If you're interesting in helping me
> >do that, email me.
>
>
> So. . . this is where you shed your journalistic ethics and join the chorus
> of bashers? If so, why wait 2 weeks. . . you were in the room. . . and you
> didn't say anything? Shame on you.
Whoa ... easy thar. Realize that Vince has gradually become convinced
(like many of us) that Hopkins is a problem we must to solve by
working together through any and all means, fair and unfair (but
probably legal). If you think journalists haven't done good by
inciting popular opinion against evil, then you don't appreciate the
history of free press in this country, be it more polite forms like
Paine's "Common Sense" or more agressive forms of symbolic speech,
such as the Boston Tea Party. Propoganda is an important facet of
war, and if you don't recognize the necessity of war at this point,
you are the enemy. Sorry bud, that's just where things have
progressed (or regressed).
> > BTW, Hopkins knew that his speech would be controversial. Before he
> started
> > the presentation he said "If you don't like chocolate, then you won't like
> > chocolate cake, you won't like chocolate pudding, and you won't like
> > chocolate ice cream. If you don't like the opening of this talk, then you
> > aren't going to like any of it-it's all chocolate!"
>
> Yes he did say that. Is there some part of that analogy that is faulty?
Yes - there are limits to what you can do with chocolate - even in the
chocolate market. You don't mix it with jalapeno peppers or
vegetables. Drum corps is not chocolate - marching band (as Hopkins
suggested) is chocolate (though I'm not sure that's a compliment that
marching band deserves).
> > >Drum Corps Is Marching Band: Discussion of the Rules We Love To Hate
> >
> > I mentioned that George wrote his presentation backwards. That's because he
> > put the conclusion he wanted to reach first and his assumptions, goals, and
> > reasoning, such as it is, last or near the end. I think if his
> assumptions
> > and goals were placed first, there would be better lines of reasoning that
> > would produce different conclusions!
> So. . . can you give your version of how this should have gone please?
> Seems like amplification passed. . .
Sure ... and they had to isolate the voters from the activity's only
free voice (RAMD) to do it.
> > >Bands Become The PlayGround For Creativity
> > > *Bands use amplification.
> >
> > Not a creative way to get loud.
>
>
> Hmmm. . . maybe not YOUR creative way. . . but a solution none-the-less.
Grounding the pit was a solution too, whose impact we are only
beginning to understand. How little understanding of an issue do you
suggest before a vote? Our forefathers created a successful free
nation because they were well studied in historical politics, and, by
'seeing beyond the years,' headed off problems before they presented
themselves. Had they not used the explicit language that "all men are
created equal," there would have been no argument for slavery, and we
would be another stratified society of slaves.
I once indexed the Senator Jake Garn collection (1st senator in space,
FWIW) for the University of Utah. You wouldn't believe the amount of
research these guys do before voting on legislature. I'll bet we also
wouldn't believe how little is done by others (who think they know the
issues) if we knew about them.
> How exactly is "creativity" measured anyway? The root word "create" would
> seem to indicate something other than what you espouse.
I know of an artist who did a performance piece requiring that he be
infected by aids, on stage, in a very bloody and graphic manner. Is
that creativity? Or just politics in the guise of creativity?
Allowing politics or finances to influence creative policy is
dangerous. Performing surgery before you understand anatomy is too.
> Regarding water sounds, or duplicating a human voice. . . which instrument
> does that exactly? Rainsticks you say. . . so when is the last time you
> heard a rainstick sound like it's supposed to from the top of the stadium?
> Or is that the point. . . we can't make it happen the way it's currently set
> up, so we ask for amplification.
How much sense does it make to discuss elaborate instrumentation when
you haven't written music for the instrument yet? A little like
trying to find new instruments to play "chopsticks" on, isn't it?
> The level of dance proficiency being displayed by today's high school guards
> OFTEN blows drum corps dancing out of the water. The Blue Devils, SCV and
> Cadets of today are not the norm in the drum corps activity in the areas of
> dance. Yes, years ago dance occurred in very limited instances. We're not
> talking about the "existence" of dance. We're talking about maximizing the
> use of effective moves. . .
>
> So. . . yes, hiring a dance instructor might be a good idea.
Again, I think its pretty silly to worry about how well we dance when
you don't know how to lift an instrument without taking 5-10 years off
the life of the artist, or marching without falling on your face, or
change directions without broadcasting it to the world 3 counts ahead
of time.
> > > *Bands use costuming (they have money).
(We aren't rich like bands. Boo-hoo.)
> > Corps have used costuming since the Madison Scouts in 1970 (Alice in
> > Wonderland show). As for the part about the money--as my favorite .sig of
> > Levi Boldt's said: "Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most
> > of the time he will pick himself up and continue." - Winston Churchill.
> > Hey, George, have a nice trip. See you next fall!
>
>
> Again, yes. Both corps and bands use costuming. But. . . bands are doing
> it better than we are. . . and that was not always the case. The point. . .
> as you pick apart each statement out of context is. . . that bands learned
> from us, and then began to leave us in the dust creatively. Not ALL bands.
> . . but the best bands. (And of course I speak of creativity, not
> performance level).
You are concerned about non-essentials. What counts - what we have
allowed ourselves to become distracted from - are the drum corps
marching arts: choreographed marching, rudimental drumming,
flag/rifle/sabre ancillary, and *original* (god forbid) music.
Regarding the latter, we have only recently become a viable fetus.
Happy birthday to us. So we've made progress musically. Great. To
bad it cost us the respect of the band profession.
> Point out where we saved drum corps by not adding a third valve,
> any key, etc.
Well, we became the state of the art regarding rifle, flag, drumming,
marching, and drill. All of the money and amplification in the world
won't buy that back.
> > > *We kept the name drum and bugle corps, even though we had no bugles.
(Still doesn't know what a bugle is. These are the people determining
creative restrictions in this activity.)
> > 1. According to the New Harvard Dictionary of Music, the two-valve G horns
> > used in drum corps--even today--are bugles. If that dictionary had been
> > revised since 1990, it would probably list the three-valve G horns as
> > bugles, too. According to what is arguably the most authoritative source
> > of definitions in music, drum corps still has bugles!
>
>
> Please read the numerous posts and information supplied by Jeff Mitchell.
> We haven't played bugles in a very long time. . . just a hybrid.
We haven't sounded like drum corps in a very long time either.
> Getting caught up in semantics is a pointless exercise in futiliy
A bugle has a certain ratio of conical to cylindrical bore tubing.
Our ignorance about that ratio may be an unknown, but it is not a
matter of semantics. Its a matter of physics.
> > 3. If Hopkins is such a marketing 'genkus' then he should recognize the
> > brand value in Drum Corps and understand that alone would drive us to keep
> > the name!
> There is no brand "value" in terms of marketing if the product is unknown.
So you too have given up on drum corps? Are you also out of ideas?
Are you also ashamed of it? These are pretty disgraceful positions.
Geez, if you guys are out of ideas, leave already and let someone else
have a turn.
> > >*INDEED we reinforced the notion that what we do is good --- and not to
> > be compared to the marching band world.
> >
> > About this point in his talk, Hopkins made a reference to how difficult it
> > was to pick up the girls at "Hogs and Honeys", a bar near the hotel, by
> > saying that he was with a drum corps. He said that if he told them he was
> > with a marching band, they'd at least figure out he was a 'band geek' and
> > know how to deal with him.
>
>
> Vince. . . I saw you there too. How'd you do with the drum corps version?
>
> :-)
So that's Hopkins' grand vision of modern drum corps - the one that
turned Acheson into a drinking buddy: "Which line will get you laid."
Congratulations, guys. You're a real inspiration.
> > >AND ... as we won in our fight to be the same
> >
> > Actually, that fight was lost--junior drum corps does *not* look or sound
> > the same today as in 1972, 1982, or even 1992, despite Hopkins' complaints
> > of staleness and boredom!
> Missed point.
You're not alone. So did everyone else who can't hear or explain the
difference between bugles and other brass.
> Not "the same as the past". . . the same as each other.
> George is talking about trying to once again get seperate identities for
> different drum corps.
Anyone else recognize the danger of pursuing this policy? The Chicago
Symphony isn't respected because they're different. They're respected
because they're good.
> There is no drum corps in the country
> that is more than $50,000.00 away from folding. What would we rather do. . . > die by attrition or die actively pursuing a future?
You guys have no "living" solution?
> > > *The believers continue to extol the virtues of the institution
> > > called drum and bugle corps.
> >
> > This is a *good* thing!
>
>
> How so? What will be better about remaining the same as we are now? Heck,
> Vince, most of the people on RAMD don't even like drum corps today. . . so
> do we try to appease the group that will never be appeased, or do we move on
> knowing nothing we do makes them happy anyway?
Geez this activity is lost. Hey guys, remember marching? Drill?
Drumming? Bugles? Drum and bugles? Drum and bugle corps? Any of
this ringing a bell?
Well, I've got to snip about 2/3 of this post because I just don't
have the time. Let's cut to the chase.
> You know, I don't support all the proposals -- and you can Google on
> chuckn...@attbi.com to see that this is true. But I wince when I see
> such thin logic, lack of alternatives presented, and such inaccuracies and
> pettiness in your arguments. You will FAIL miserably if these are your best
> tactics.
Chuck, you aren't defending drum corps here too well yourself. You
defend Hoppy's advocacy of creativity (sans qualifications to define
the word in this context), yet when was the last time you created
something for the activity? Surely the Cavies success with
substandard composition has demonstrated you're capable of more? How
can you suggest drum and bugle corps has run its course when all its
done for the last 50 years is play someone else's music. What have
you done to create a market here? You know, musical theater doesn't
continue to exist because it plays arrangements of whatever it can get
its hands on. Geez, they're recycling their old shows. You haven't
even considered writing a show good enough for that, have you?
> You might still have time. . . but the clock is ticking. . . the best thing
> about drum corps fans is their passion.
This isn't about fans. This is about drum corps. You guys have taken
your eyes off the ball.
> The worst thing about drum corps
> fans is that their passion too often interferes with clear thinking when
> trying to achieve objectives.
And the worst thing about drum corps instructors is that the passion
of the fans they love so much interferes with their ability to create
drum and bugle corps.
Chuck, you (and quite a few of your colleagues) need to get away from
Hopkins and do your own thinking for a while. His frustration over
not having had a decent hit for a while (another Michael Jackson
analogy) is beginning to make you pessimistic toward an art you have
served an awful long time. Don't go out like this.
Stuart E. Rice
www.marchingresearch.com
chucknaffier
First off -- nice to hear from you again.
Secondly, please indulge me in a brief question.
What would you hope the outcome to be by having this conversation?
I'll certainly be happy to reply to your commentary in a little while, but
I'm curious as to how you hope this goes.
Hope it's warmer in Utah than in Colorado. . .
Chuck
"Stuart Rice" <ser...@juno.com> wrote in message
news:d12adb54.03021...@posting.google.com...
chucknaffier
"Jim Blansett" <blan...@manta.colostate.edu> wrote in message
news:ohtg4v82eru0js1n3...@4ax.com...
*major snip*
> >Another question: Have pipe bands always existed as they currently do?
Was
> >there a starting point that is different than what you see now?
> >
> >Who knows, maybe I'll become a pipe band fan. . . so. . . at least thanks
> >for the information.
> >
> >Chuck
> >
>
> There's a fairly good one based in the Fort, Chuck. Perhaps you
> should check it out.
>
> BTW, did you happen to catch the Brazilian Guitar Quartet at The
> Lincoln last Saturday? Magnificent!
Hi Jim,
Care to help a guy out with a website, or a group name? I remember years
ago Drew McMahon told me he was involved in one (maybe the Scottish
Highlanders?) up in Estes Park (yes, Drew, I have a long memory).
I sincerely wish I had been able to see the Brazilian Guitar Quartet!! My
oldest was sick with a fever all weekend and my wife was traveling. I would
have gone in a minute except for that 102.4 temperature for a sad little
boy.
Chuck
Jeff
Stuart Rice wrote:
"chucknaffier" <chuckn...@attbi.com> wrote in message news:<wsy1a.47039$iG3.5486@sccrnsc02>..."Richard V. Lamb" <prof...@frontiernet.net> wrote in message news:v4cj4kj...@corp.supernews.com..."Sis" <sist...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:3E460F1F...@worldnet.att.net...
*We kept the name drum and bugle corps, even though we had no bugles.
(Still doesn't know what a bugle is. These are the people determining creative restrictions in this activity.)1. According to the New Harvard Dictionary of Music, the two-valve G horns used in drum corps--even today--are bugles. If that dictionary had been revised since 1990, it would probably list the three-valve G horns as bugles, too. According to what is arguably the most authoritative source of definitions in music, drum corps still has bugles!Please read the numerous posts and information supplied by Jeff Mitchell. We haven't played bugles in a very long time. . . just a hybrid.We haven't sounded like drum corps in a very long time either.Getting caught up in semantics is a pointless exercise in futiliyA bugle has a certain ratio of conical to cylindrical bore tubing. Our ignorance about that ratio may be an unknown, but it is not a matter of semantics. Its a matter of physics.
There are two definitions for bugles that appear in the brass family. Much confusion has resulted when people confuse or connect them in discussion.
The original instrument was derived from the horn of a young bull and was completely conical in nature. The French single wrap design (similar to the modern flugelhorn) and the british double compact design fall into this category. Then there are the variety of instruments that drum corps has defined as bugles since it's inception. The original "bugles" were, in fact, valveless field trumpets. The War Department's Technical Manual for Field Music, TM 20-250, dated 1940, makes that perfectly clear. (It also suggests an earlier date for band/corps interaction as the F slide was designated in 1892, when the US military ceased the use of calvary bugle.) Here is the definition from Uncle Sam;
"General- The field trumpet is a military signal horn pitched in G and equipped with a tuning slide which may be used to adjust discrepancies of pitch between several instruments or drawn to the F mark for use with a band." Nowhere in this manual is the word bugle mentioned. Trumpet appears many times in this manual on an instrument labeled as a "US Regulation Bugle", so again another source for possible confusion.
The early soprano bugles of drum corps were field trumpets, valveless of course, and defined by their cylindrical nature as were the small baritones of that era. They, as the instruments of today, have a long history of outdoor usage. The constant defining characteristics of a bugle, in drum corps terms, is in the bell front design or the shape/look of the instrument, not in any ratio of tubing. There is actually much variation in the ratio of conical to cylindrical tubing in the various bugle voices. At one extreme you have the highly cylindrical soprano and small bell baritone/trombonium and the highly conical flugelhorn and french horn at the other.
Jeff
Jeff Ream
two guys ( or more if a tag team) go out and have a cheorgraphed match in front
of a crowd.
and it makes McMahon lots of money. Sure, he's glitzed it up from time to time,
but it's still basically pro wrestling, and it still draws crowds and makes
money.
Maybe Vince should run DCI.....at least he knows how to market.
>Subject: Re: DCI PRESENTATION UNCOVERED
>From: MC mca...@mindspring.com
>Date: 2/10/2003 11:25 AM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <3E47D271...@mindspring.com>
Jeff Ream
>Subject: Re: DCI PRESENTATION UNCOVERED
>From: ser...@juno.com (Stuart Rice)
>Date: 2/10/2003 2:56 PM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <d12adb54.03021...@posting.google.com>
sgordon
:> If the goal is to increase participation at all costs, why
:> not just change drumcorps into football?
: Because we don't play football.
My point EXACTLY. We don't play band, we play drumcorps.
But popularity would skyrocket. If that is the only goal,
then why not do it? Wouldn't George approve? It's the same logic.
: Another question: Have pipe bands always existed as they currently do?
: Was there a starting point that is different than what you see now?
Come to think of it, I don't know the details of when the basic rules
and format used today were solidified. But most of the repetoire is
traditional music, and the required format of march/strathspey/reel
utilzes tempos and dances hundreds of years old. I have a variety
of recordings through the past few decades, and the consistency is
remarkable.
Also, the pipes themselves, I believe, are relatively unchanged
since the 1700s, when the third drone was added.
I guess my point is, say you really became curious about the pipes
and drums, and went to a championships to check it out. And, you
got there and they were doing opera instead. You ask, where are
the pipes and drums? To which, they answer, "opera is better, so
now we do opera at pipe and drum competitions." That would be silly.
Just like changing drumcorps to bands so that "drumcorps" can be
more popular, is also a silly concept.
Scott
MC
Sis wrote:
> I would venture a guess that the Directors of that pipe band
> organization have not changed their activity to anything else than the
> pipe band activity that they love and thereby have not destroyed their
> activity from within.
There are folks who think that new instruments should be
added, kilts done away with, etc. Fortunately there are too
many people in pipe bands and leadership positions who
appreciate the activity for what it is - pipes and drums -
and who appreciate the traditions associated with it.
Overall, tradition is not looked on as quaint, or viewed
with distaste as it often is in drum corps. In fact, the
opposite is true, tradition is celebrated and adhered to
in a healthy balance. Seems to be working, as the number
of pipe bands greatly exceeds the number of drum corps.
> Vince was correct when he called it treason. It is an act of
> deliberate betrayal and disloyalty to the activity. It is
> subversive to drum corps, overthrowing drum corps from within.
But treason, by definition, implies a betrayal of trust.
Given the abundance of commentary from posts here and
in DCW/DCI Today, how could anyone believe or trust that
the pro-change guys were acting in support of the entire
activity, or any concept of traditional drum corps?
They're doing what they think is best. Their position is
mostly sincere, but sincerely wrong in my opinion. That
doesn't = treason in my book unless these guys posed as
guardians of the activity or drum corps "patriots".
They clearly haven't.
Many have definitely lost faith in drum corps as a viable
ensemble after too many years in the trenches. That means
it's time for some new faces and better ideas than copying
what's already out there.
Treason also implies that marching bands are the enemy,
but they simply aren't. The majority of the members in MB
respect and appreciate the differences between the two
activities.
If you took a vote of both MB and DC members instead of
staffs and directors, I believe electronics, amplification
and woodwinds in DC would fail miserably, and Bb probably
would not have passed.
The kids in MB already have that gear, and I believe the
majority like drum corps BECAUSE it doesn't - BECAUSE
it's different.
Read the BOA forums sometime, you'll see what I'm talking
about. Most of the posts about the rules changes are against
the them because they duplicate MB.
Given that, it's a waste of energy to rail against MB as
a whole, or turn this into a "war" against that activity.
That's making "enemies" out of a huge group of people who
are in reality, allies.
Not unlike the liberal/conservative - Democrat/Republican
gibberish that keeps the general populace distracted and
at each other's throats, each side in this is being played
against the other.
That keeps the focus off what the small number of people who
actually make the rules are doing, be it the big Congress in
Washington, or the small one in a hotel.
The "enemy" is ultimately us.
Until both sides work together to make it crystal clear to
the guys calling the shots that these changes aren't wanted
or needed, we have no one to blame but ourselves.
Regards,
Michael Cahill
chucknaffier
Thanks for giving me something to think about.
I ask you two things sincerely:
1) If I were able to do something about this, what would be your request?
2) Many people already don't like drum corps in its current state (no amps,
but multikey, big pits, dancing, etc.) -- so -- knowing that those changes
are not going away, are you of the opinion that just continuing to program
more audience-friendly shows will grow the activity's fan base, generate
better revenue, and lead to more drum corps? In other words, can we
continue with 2002 drum corps and be successful? If yes, why? If no, what
should drum corps look and sound like on the field?
No sarcasm intended, implied, or even thought of while asking these
questions.
Thanks, Scott --
Chuck Naffier
____________________
"sgordon" <sgo...@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:Nd12a.65520$Ik.27...@typhoon.sonic.net...
Stuart Rice
> Stuart,
>
> First off -- nice to hear from you again.
Great to see you posting too!
> Secondly, please indulge me in a brief question.
>
> What would you hope the outcome to be by having this conversation?
Actually, I usually prefer that people just take my comments at face
value and leave it at that, but since you're among those who have a
little more self-control than others I've chatted with, I welcome your
dialogue.
> I'll certainly be happy to reply to your commentary in a little while, but
> I'm curious as to how you hope this goes.
Hope for this activity are in short supply these days, thanks to this
activity's low esteem of education.
> Hope it's warmer in Utah than in Colorado. . .
Strangely, it has been considerably warmer. The rockies have until
recently been dividing the cold system of the east from the warmer
weather out west.
Stuart E. Rice
www.marchingresearch.com
bill turner
In article <Qt92a.68037$iG3.8324@sccrnsc02>,
"chucknaffier" <chuckn...@attbi.com> wrote:
> Scott,
>
> Thanks for giving me something to think about.
>
> I ask you two things sincerely:
>
> 1) If I were able to do something about this, what would be your request?
>
> 2) Many people already don't like drum corps in its current state (no amps,
> but multikey, big pits, dancing, etc.) -- so -- knowing that those changes
> are not going away, are you of the opinion that just continuing to program
> more audience-friendly shows will grow the activity's fan base, generate
> better revenue, and lead to more drum corps? In other words, can we
> continue with 2002 drum corps and be successful? If yes, why? If no, what
> should drum corps look and sound like on the field?
I'm always surprised at this attitude. If sufficient people don't like
something, why *not* change it; why *can't* it go away?
When people ask me to play "Happy Birthday" at a party, I don't extoll
the virtues of Beethoven's "Hammerclavier." When *I'm* the
entertainment, I play what folks want to hear.
Pipe band is a wonderful model for drum corps folk to consider. Most
corps folk I've asked don't like pipe band as much as corps. Yet there's
no denying its popularity. It's akin to drum corps' popularity back in
the '50's and '60's, not in numbers (for pipe band is larger), but in
the appeal of a pretty obscure, marginally musical endeavour. For some
reason, people love it, just like people once loved junior corps.
For 30 years, DCI has evolved drum corps into the ground. Totally
counterintuitive, since every change was made with the sincere intention
of making the shows more "popular." What's really annoying is that, as
the footprint of drum corps shrinks, DCI touts its "successful" years,
as if its long-term debt and the number of corporate sponsors were
useful measures of a youth activity.
I think that a single philosophical change might turn it around: the
only measure of success for DCI and its member corps should be the
number of kids participating annually. The experience of diverse kids
growing together is the single constant between junior corps of the
1940's and junior corps today.
To maximize that number, DCI's actions should be oriented toward
reducing the income required for each corps to compete; and getting back
to the basics of drums and bugles would be the most obvious
cost-reducing place to start. Reducing the need for extensive national
tours will likewise reduce the income required. Unwinding the season
from six intensive weeks to a more relaxed, near-year-round and
continent-wide activity would help. Finally, eliminating compensation
for consultants and creative people, for a fixed period of say five
years, would level the playing field to a great degree.
Mike D. said (words to this effect) that any change reducing the
entertainment value of the "product" would "kill" the whole thing; but
it is the example of pipe band that belies his words. Corps was far more
popular when it was "dead cats" playing chrome-plated bugles; and every
change to make corps more "musical" has simply made it less popular and
more elitist.
-- bill
chucknaffier
"bill turner" <bill_ge...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:bill_gets_stuff-85...@orngca-news03.socal.rr.com...
> If I might stick my nose in,
Hi Bill,
Consider your nose stuck. . . :-)
> In article <Qt92a.68037$iG3.8324@sccrnsc02>,
> "chucknaffier" <chuckn...@attbi.com> wrote:
>
> > Scott,
> >
> > Thanks for giving me something to think about.
> >
> > I ask you two things sincerely:
> >
> > 1) If I were able to do something about this, what would be your
request?
> >
> > 2) Many people already don't like drum corps in its current state (no
amps,
> > but multikey, big pits, dancing, etc.) -- so -- knowing that those
changes
> > are not going away, are you of the opinion that just continuing to
program
> > more audience-friendly shows will grow the activity's fan base, generate
> > better revenue, and lead to more drum corps? In other words, can we
> > continue with 2002 drum corps and be successful? If yes, why? If no,
what
> > should drum corps look and sound like on the field?
>
> I'm always surprised at this attitude. If sufficient people don't like
> something, why *not* change it; why *can't* it go away?
My point is that I haven't seen many new additions to drum corps go away. I
must use that as the model for lack of another. Would it bother me if we
went back to G bugles, smaller pits, etc.? No, it would not. There is no
"can't" in this case. . . only "won't".
> When people ask me to play "Happy Birthday" at a party, I don't extoll
> the virtues of Beethoven's "Hammerclavier." When *I'm* the
> entertainment, I play what folks want to hear.
Indeed, I asked about more popular programming, which (I assume) is one of
the arguments against today's drum corps? Or am I mistaken?
> Pipe band is a wonderful model for drum corps folk to consider. Most
> corps folk I've asked don't like pipe band as much as corps. Yet there's
> no denying its popularity. It's akin to drum corps' popularity back in
> the '50's and '60's, not in numbers (for pipe band is larger), but in
> the appeal of a pretty obscure, marginally musical endeavour. For some
> reason, people love it, just like people once loved junior corps.
>
> For 30 years, DCI has evolved drum corps into the ground. Totally
> counterintuitive, since every change was made with the sincere intention
> of making the shows more "popular." What's really annoying is that, as
> the footprint of drum corps shrinks, DCI touts its "successful" years,
> as if its long-term debt and the number of corporate sponsors were
> useful measures of a youth activity.
Interesting. In the unlikely event that drum corps would decide to return
to its roots, which roots would we return to? The '50's? The 80's? Not
trying to be a jerk about this. . . but lets say you have the power right
now to turn back the clock. What time is it?
> I think that a single philosophical change might turn it around: the
> only measure of success for DCI and its member corps should be the
> number of kids participating annually. The experience of diverse kids
> growing together is the single constant between junior corps of the
> 1940's and junior corps today.
This is a good thought. I will remember it.
> To maximize that number, DCI's actions should be oriented toward
> reducing the income required for each corps to compete; and getting back
> to the basics of drums and bugles would be the most obvious
> cost-reducing place to start. Reducing the need for extensive national
> tours will likewise reduce the income required. Unwinding the season
> from six intensive weeks to a more relaxed, near-year-round and
> continent-wide activity would help. Finally, eliminating compensation
> for consultants and creative people, for a fixed period of say five
> years, would level the playing field to a great degree.
DCI can't do much about anything other than the tour. There are real-world
realities to deal with -- the very real obstacle of having school schedules
start in early August in some places, getting out around June 21st in other
areas. The other decisions are very much up to the individual corps.
Other than on the newsgroups, I do not see support for forming drum corps in
communities. I certainly do not have the finances to start a drum corps in
Ft. Collins, Colorado. It would fun to do. . . but I won't mortagage my
house to do it.
Any suggestions?
> Mike D. said (words to this effect) that any change reducing the
> entertainment value of the "product" would "kill" the whole thing; but
> it is the example of pipe band that belies his words. Corps was far more
> popular when it was "dead cats" playing chrome-plated bugles; and every
> change to make corps more "musical" has simply made it less popular and
> more elitist.
>
> -- bill
At the risk of incurring the wrath of those older than me, my initial
reaction is that the further back in time we go, the less sophisticated and
more easily entertained the general population was. Put "Howdy Doody" on
today. . . or "The Show of Shows". . . all those wonderful, and now
nostalgic, shows. Would they get the same reaction?
Maybe this isn't your point. If I'm in my own trap here thinking you want
to turn back the clock, help me get unstuck.
Chuck Naffier
sgordon
: 1) If I were able to do something about this, what would be your request?
I don't know. The activity is going so far astray that I don't think
that just one thing or one act can fix it. For the first time in my
life I'm beginning to think that it may be a lost cause and that these
recent rules changes are merely symptoms and not the underlying problem.
At this point, I don't think any less than an overhaul of junior corps
governance structure can reverse this trend. At the rate things are
going, I can't really see junior drumcorps surviving much longer...
it may simply get absorbed into the band activity.
: 2) Many people already don't like drum corps in its current state (no amps,
: but multikey, big pits, dancing, etc.) -- so -- knowing that those changes
: are not going away, are you of the opinion that just continuing to program
: more audience-friendly shows will grow the activity's fan base, generate
: better revenue, and lead to more drum corps?
YES, if you remove the word "continuing".
: In other words, can we continue with 2002 drum corps and be successful?
No, that's a different thing than you stated above, because I don't
think that 2002 drum corps represents "audience-friendly" shows.
: If yes, why? If no, what should drum corps look and sound like
: on the field?
Until very recently, brass/drums meant precision execution of
thrilling music, and guard meant precision rifle/flag work.
The last 15 years has seen a rapid evolution to guard being
dance ensemble (diluting its uniqueness), and the brass/drums
role being primarily to generate sounds that support the now
equally-important visual arts presentation. With that in mind,
I think that anything prior to about 1990 constitutes drumcorps,
with about 1965-1985 being the peak period of the quality of
the product. Note that most of that was before my time, so I'm
not just waxing nostalgic. It's just my opinion; I'm sure
many will disagree.
As a side note, I do a fair amount of volunteer work recording
drumcorps (my name is in the credits on a number of DCI and various
corps CDs). My interest in recording corps is due to my long-held
conjecture that it is a uniquely interesting natural acoustic sound
worthy of being properly documented and preserved. Very recently
I've begun to question whether this is true anymore, and with the
advent of electronics, I'm not sure the activity will sustain
my interest in this regard. It's not an important issue, just
another data point from one fan.
Scott
Jeff Ream
owners....clueless.
chucknaffier
> chucknaffier <chuckn...@attbi.com> wrote:
> : 1) If I were able to do something about this, what would be your
request?
>
> I don't know. The activity is going so far astray that I don't think
> that just one thing or one act can fix it. For the first time in my
> life I'm beginning to think that it may be a lost cause and that these
> recent rules changes are merely symptoms and not the underlying problem.
> At this point, I don't think any less than an overhaul of junior corps
> governance structure can reverse this trend. At the rate things are
> going, I can't really see junior drumcorps surviving much longer...
> it may simply get absorbed into the band activity.
Well. . . if you think of something, let me know.
> : 2) Many people already don't like drum corps in its current state (no
amps,
> : but multikey, big pits, dancing, etc.) -- so -- knowing that those
changes
> : are not going away, are you of the opinion that just continuing to
program
> : more audience-friendly shows will grow the activity's fan base, generate
> : better revenue, and lead to more drum corps?
>
> YES, if you remove the word "continuing".
Okay.
> : In other words, can we continue with 2002 drum corps and be successful?
>
> No, that's a different thing than you stated above, because I don't
> think that 2002 drum corps represents "audience-friendly" shows.
Okay. Understood.
> : If yes, why? If no, what should drum corps look and sound like
> : on the field?
>
> Until very recently, brass/drums meant precision execution of
> thrilling music, and guard meant precision rifle/flag work.
> The last 15 years has seen a rapid evolution to guard being
> dance ensemble (diluting its uniqueness), and the brass/drums
> role being primarily to generate sounds that support the now
> equally-important visual arts presentation. With that in mind,
> I think that anything prior to about 1990 constitutes drumcorps,
> with about 1965-1985 being the peak period of the quality of
> the product. Note that most of that was before my time, so I'm
> not just waxing nostalgic. It's just my opinion; I'm sure
> many will disagree.
>
> As a side note, I do a fair amount of volunteer work recording
> drumcorps (my name is in the credits on a number of DCI and various
> corps CDs). My interest in recording corps is due to my long-held
> conjecture that it is a uniquely interesting natural acoustic sound
> worthy of being properly documented and preserved. Very recently
> I've begun to question whether this is true anymore, and with the
> advent of electronics, I'm not sure the activity will sustain
> my interest in this regard. It's not an important issue, just
> another data point from one fan.
Thanks for following up, Scott. You've given me something to think about.
Chuck Naffier
> Scott
>
chucknaffier
And this is prompted by?
If it's not obvious, I am trying to listen to concerns being articulated by
some pretty passionate and intelligent people here. This helps how?
Chuck Naffier
"Jeff Ream" <jeffs...@aol.comspamthis> wrote in message
news:20030211125824...@mb-mp.aol.com...
Jeff Ream
of the hands of Joe any fan.
>Subject: Re: DCI PRESENTATION UNCOVERED
>From: "chucknaffier" chuckn...@attbi.com
>Date: 2/11/2003 1:02 PM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <RUa2a.67153$SD6.4270@sccrnsc03>
Sis
>
> Sis wrote:
>
> >
> > Vince was correct when he called it treason. It is an act of
> > deliberate betrayal and disloyalty to the activity. It is
> > subversive to drum corps, overthrowing drum corps from within.
>
> But treason, by definition, implies a betrayal of trust.
Yeah? I think that when drum corps was delivered into the hands of DCI
and the Directors of the drum corps that would make the decisions for
drum corps that it was done so with the trust that DCI and drum corps
directors would do whatever it took to protect the activity and not
deliver it into the hands of another activity? No? :-\
>
>
> Given the abundance of commentary from posts here and
> in DCW/DCI Today, how could anyone believe or trust that
> the pro-change guys were acting in support of the entire
> activity, or any concept of traditional drum corps?
Agreed, (I think !) :-)
>
>
> They're doing what they think is best. Their position is
> mostly sincere, but sincerely wrong in my opinion. That
> doesn't = treason in my book unless these guys posed as
> guardians of the activity or drum corps "patriots".
Didn't they? Weren't they going to save drum corps from the American
Legion and the CYO? I don't know what the original DCI charter says,
but I have asked for (and have not received) a copy of the charter from
DCI. I assumed that protection of the activity was assumed under the
charter. However, I could be completely wrong, the charter could call
for drum corps dissolution, for all I know,. ;-)
>
>
> They clearly haven't.
Right, We agree. (I think) ;-)
>
>
> Many have definitely lost faith in drum corps as a viable
> ensemble after too many years in the trenches. That means
> it's time for some new faces and better ideas than copying
> what's already out there.
If by this you mean new leadership and a more democratic way of voting
in changes, I agree with you. If you mean copying the band organization
that is already out there as drum corps, I again agree that that is not
the way to go. If by this you mean the new faces of the current
leadership then I disagree.
>
>
> Treason also implies that marching bands are the enemy,
> but they simply aren't. The majority of the members in MB
> respect and appreciate the differences between the two
> activities.
No, I don't think treason implies marching bands are the enemy, Mike.
Treason in the sense of the word where someone is given the authority
and trust of the membership of the organization; to betray that trust,
is just that. The alternative isn't the enemy.
>
>
> If you took a vote of both MB and DC members instead of
> staffs and directors, I believe electronics, amplification
> and woodwinds in DC would fail miserably, and Bb probably
> would not have passed.
>
> The kids in MB already have that gear, and I believe the
> majority like drum corps BECAUSE it doesn't - BECAUSE
> it's different.
Agreed. :-\ I don't see where we differ.
>
>
> Read the BOA forums sometime, you'll see what I'm talking
> about. Most of the posts about the rules changes are against
> the them because they duplicate MB.
Good, fine, wonderful, agreed. :-\
>
>
> Given that, it's a waste of energy to rail against MB as
> a whole, or turn this into a "war" against that activity.
> That's making "enemies" out of a huge group of people who
> are in reality, allies.
Good, fine, wonderful, agreed. My intention isn't to make enemies out
of marching band people. They don't even enter into my equation at all.
If they're allies, all the better!
>
>
> Not unlike the liberal/conservative - Democrat/Republican
> gibberish that keeps the general populace distracted and
> at each other's throats, each side in this is being played
> against the other.
Okay, I'm starting to get your point, I think, but I do not think
marching band is the enemy, nor do I think members of marching band are
the enemy. The problem falls square on the people who have been given
the complete authority over the future of drum corps, a very small
number of voting members of DCI.
>
>
> That keeps the focus off what the small number of people who
> actually make the rules are doing, be it the big Congress in
> Washington, or the small one in a hotel.
Hell no, Michael. I'm all for putting the focus right where it belongs.
I don't see how you figured my beef was with the marching band activity
or marching band people, I thought I made it perfectly crystal clear
where I lay the blame.
>
>
> The "enemy" is ultimately us.
I don't think that when the junior activity became DCI anyone had ever
conceived that there would come a time when the directorship would want
to disassemble the activity by the slow cloning of another activity. I
ask you Michael, what can we do about it? I am all ears!
>
>
> Until both sides work together to make it crystal clear to
> the guys calling the shots that these changes aren't wanted
> or needed, we have no one to blame but ourselves.
Hi Mike!
I'm not entirely sure what you are trying to say. Both sides as in
"drum corps" and "marching band" should make it clear to the guys
calling the shots that these changes aren't wanted or needed?
I won't speak for marching band because I don't much care what their
opinion is. They can continue to express it on the band newsgroup if
they'd like and I don't really care one way or another how they feel
about it. I don't consider them the enemy. I consider George Hopkins
and everyone who wishes to destroy the drum corps activity and replace
it with bands, the enemy. I thought that that was quite clear.
Whether you want to call it treason or the enemy or whatever, it doesn't
much matter to me. I believe that I have made it QUITE crystal clear my
feelings that these changes aren't wanted. However, the powers that be
find the changes necessary to keep themselves afloat. I don't blame
myself for that and I don't see how you think we should blame ourselves
for that.
We're usually on the same page, Michael, and I assume we probably are in
this case too, I just don't quite understand what you are trying to say
or where you are trying to put the blame.
Best wishes, as always,
Jackie
>
>
chucknaffier
How can price be an issue if you don't even like the product?
Apparently DCI IS listening to the larger percentage of consumers. . . given
the new financial stability. That stability is brought about in part by
ticket sales, not just at Finals, but at all contests sponsored by DCI.
If this is really your problem, wait one year, let's compare revenue figures
from 2002/2003, national attendance figures. etc.
Then, let's do it again after the first year of amplification.
Right now we have intense passion, but no stats. A fine start, not an
arrival point.
take care,
Chuck Naffier
"Jeff Ream" <jeffs...@aol.comspamthis> wrote in message
news:20030211132657...@mb-mp.aol.com...
bill turner
"chucknaffier" <chuckn...@attbi.com> wrote:
The judging system rewards these elements, else they wouldn't be there.
> > When people ask me to play "Happy Birthday" at a party, I don't extoll
> > the virtues of Beethoven's "Hammerclavier." When *I'm* the
> > entertainment, I play what folks want to hear.
>
>
> Indeed, I asked about more popular programming, which (I assume) is one of
> the arguments against today's drum corps? Or am I mistaken?
Criticizing the programming isn't something I like to do. Obviously
what's played is an important part of corps' popularity. Back in the day
when 8 out of 10 corps played recognizeably "popular music," 27th
brought 'em to their feet with the relatively obscure "Crown Imperial"
even before the opening push. Some things work and some don't, it's
always been that way; and what works is sometimes surprising. The show
should *definitely* move the audience, however somehow this became
"General Effect" which seems entirely a different thing.
> > Pipe band is a wonderful model for drum corps folk to consider. Most
> > corps folk I've asked don't like pipe band as much as corps. Yet there's
> > no denying its popularity. It's akin to drum corps' popularity back in
> > the '50's and '60's, not in numbers (for pipe band is larger), but in
> > the appeal of a pretty obscure, marginally musical endeavour. For some
> > reason, people love it, just like people once loved junior corps.
> >
> > For 30 years, DCI has evolved drum corps into the ground. Totally
> > counterintuitive, since every change was made with the sincere intention
> > of making the shows more "popular." What's really annoying is that, as
> > the footprint of drum corps shrinks, DCI touts its "successful" years,
> > as if its long-term debt and the number of corporate sponsors were
> > useful measures of a youth activity.
>
>
> Interesting. In the unlikely event that drum corps would decide to return
> to its roots, which roots would we return to? The '50's? The 80's? Not
> trying to be a jerk about this. . . but lets say you have the power right
> now to turn back the clock. What time is it?
No, I would not turn back the clock.
All eras of corps are worthy of consideration. True veterans' corps of
the 1920's, though we might call 'em "seniors" today (and Ron Allard
lists 'em that way), had many 18, 19, 20, 21, and 22-year-olds, just
like today.
To me, those corps are fun to imagine. In 1927, six drum corps (and
three bands) went to the Americal Legion championships in Paris. Think
of that tour: by boat, *maybe* some car, horse-drawn buggy... To my ear,
it's pretty easy to come up with cool things to do with "just" straight
bugles, snares, and bass drums. I feel that I inherited the stoke from
those ol' kids; and those are traditions worth maintaining.
> > I think that a single philosophical change might turn it around: the
> > only measure of success for DCI and its member corps should be the
> > number of kids participating annually. The experience of diverse kids
> > growing together is the single constant between junior corps of the
> > 1940's and junior corps today.
>
>
> This is a good thought. I will remember it.
>
>
> > To maximize that number, DCI's actions should be oriented toward
> > reducing the income required for each corps to compete; and getting back
> > to the basics of drums and bugles would be the most obvious
> > cost-reducing place to start. Reducing the need for extensive national
> > tours will likewise reduce the income required. Unwinding the season
> > from six intensive weeks to a more relaxed, near-year-round and
> > continent-wide activity would help. Finally, eliminating compensation
> > for consultants and creative people, for a fixed period of say five
> > years, would level the playing field to a great degree.
>
>
> DCI can't do much about anything other than the tour. There are real-world
> realities to deal with -- the very real obstacle of having school schedules
> start in early August in some places, getting out around June 21st in other
> areas. The other decisions are very much up to the individual corps.
DCI could do any number of things including changing the "tour."
One of the smartest might be to follow Bill Cook's model of acquiring
transportation companies, but at a national level. Suppose that DCI
provided all corps busses and trucks from it's fleet, which would be a
normal commercial fleet during the rest of the year. All corps would
have essentially the same travel costs. DCI would carry the debt for all
that capital expenditure.
If we don't abandon the "national recruiting" model (which is why we
care when kids finish/start their school year), DCI could schedule
competitions during corps camp weekends. These need not be full field
shows, standstills and yes even parades have been popular in our past.
Corps already hold camps along similar schedules.
(They don't even have to be competitions. My favorite performance under
the auspicies of DCI was when '76 SCV played a standstill at a tiny
urban inner-city park in Detroit, in conjunction with the show at
Pontiac. It was wild the way the local kids stared leerily at the SCV
kids, and vice-versa, before they played. Yanno, by the end of the
performance, those locals were cheering for us!)
> Other than on the newsgroups, I do not see support for forming drum corps in
> communities. I certainly do not have the finances to start a drum corps in
> Ft. Collins, Colorado. It would fun to do. . . but I won't mortagage my
> house to do it.
>
> Any suggestions?
Bill Cook provided the modern model: it takes several million to cover
the start-up of a modern, competitive junior corps. Shadow_7 gave us the
"other end of the spectrum," a couple thousand for straight bugles and
snares.
When I marched, a bugle cost a couple hundred dollars versus the six
hundred I had to come up with for a decent-quality trumpet. Today's
bugle prices are simply outrageous; although I appreciate the overall
sound of the hornlines I hear today, I don't think the tradeoff has been
worthwhile, i.e. we pay far too much for the improvement. Bugles
shouldn't cost what trumpets do.
Frankly, today's kids are the cream of the crop from school music
programs. They'd sound better on older-style bugles, and the evidence is
the fine hornlines from the '70's, for example Argonne '69'-'73 and
Madison '75 and '76 (there are many fine lines to choose from; these two
are my favorite). Moreover, those old fine hornlines were not comprised
of musicians; they were simply strong corps programs. Any kid could try
it, and most kids could do it.
Before all the old bugle makers on the west coast (and elsewhere) die
out, it would be nice to explore with Zigmont Kanstul just what could be
done in the way of an inexpensive bugle for the masses? Bugles have
never been a major business line for the manufacturers I know of.
Even without changing the bugle, DCI could make sufficient changes that
the cost of starting up a corps would be little more than the cost of
acquiring horns, drums, guard equipment, and uniforms. It's gotta be
possible to be competitive for less than a quarter million dollars.
> > Mike D. said (words to this effect) that any change reducing the
> > entertainment value of the "product" would "kill" the whole thing; but
> > it is the example of pipe band that belies his words. Corps was far more
> > popular when it was "dead cats" playing chrome-plated bugles; and every
> > change to make corps more "musical" has simply made it less popular and
> > more elitist.
> >
> > -- bill
>
>
> At the risk of incurring the wrath of those older than me, my initial
> reaction is that the further back in time we go, the less sophisticated and
> more easily entertained the general population was. Put "Howdy Doody" on
> today. . . or "The Show of Shows". . . all those wonderful, and now
> nostalgic, shows. Would they get the same reaction?
That's why pipe band's success, like the failure of junior corps, is
counterintuitive. (Are you really gonna argue the sophistication of
today's top t.v. shows?)
> Maybe this isn't your point. If I'm in my own trap here thinking you want
> to turn back the clock, help me get unstuck.
>
> Chuck Naffier
Hopefully my point's a little more clear. The value of corps transcends
whatever "musical educational" value it has today.
-- bill
Catherine
>Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 17:43:27 GMT
>Hi Bill,
1987 or 1988 DCI judging changes. "Errors" are discovered rather
quickly these days. The additions are wanted by the bando faction -
and always were, apparently (since there's neither truth nor honesty
nor a $$ value to such things...). Even when they promised to uphold
drum corps, there were those who valued band and consulting more than
they did corps.
>I must use that as the model for lack of another.
>Would it bother me if we went back to G bugles,
>smaller pits, etc.? No, it would not. There is
>no "can't" in this case. . . only "won't".
Gee - then it must bother "some" people, Chuck - perhaps, EVERYONE?
Since there's no "can't" but a "won't", there must be reasons for
EVERYONE to hold the line on some things while there's so much
inevitable change in others. Frankly, I don't buy the argument that
DCI-types are such marketing genuises that they just know what's going
to sell this year - particularly since it hasn't exactly produced a
drum corps paradise on earth, now has it? It's more like Nero
fiddling while Rome burns, and screaming "I'M INVINCEABLE" with all
four stumps bleeding. You're the "educator" - enlighten us...
>> When people ask me to play "Happy Birthday" at a
>> party, I don't extoll the virtues of Beethoven's
>>"Hammerclavier." When *I'm* the entertainment, I
>> play what folks want to hear.
> Indeed, I asked about more popular programming,
> which (I assume) is one of the arguments against
> today's drum corps? Or am I mistaken?
You're partly correct with regard to "programming" (try "community
crowd-friendly songs").
>> Pipe band is a wonderful model for drum corps folk to
>> consider. Most corps folk I've asked don't like pipe
>> band as much as corps. Yet there's no denying its
>> popularity. It's akin to drum corps' popularity back
>> in the '50's and '60's, not in numbers (for pipe band
>> is larger), but in the appeal of a pretty obscure,
>> marginally musical endeavour. For some reason, people
>> love it, just like people once loved junior corps.
It's because pipe band is more recognizable as drum & bugle corps than
DCI drum & bugle corps. It's military, it's traditional, it's
precise, it's not a load of bullshit with gods of all time telling
themselves how brilliant they all are for reinventing the wheel and
sneering at the entire history and past alumni of the thing they are
parasitizing in the here-and-now.
>> For 30 years, DCI has evolved drum corps into the
>> ground. Totally counterintuitive, since every
>> change was made with the sincere intention
Heheheheheheheheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee....
Not counterintuitive at all if you realize all those "sincere
intentions" - at the "can't but won't" level - were marketer's
exploitive bullshit.
>> of making the shows more "popular." What's really
>> annoying is that, as the footprint of drum corps
>> shrinks, DCI touts its "successful" years, as if
>> its long-term debt and the number of corporate
>> sponsors were useful measures of a youth activity.
> Interesting. In the unlikely event that drum corps
> would decide to return to its roots, which roots
> would we return to? The '50's? The 80's? Not
> trying to be a jerk about this. . . but lets say
> you have the power right now to turn back the clock.
> What time is it?
Whatever time the corpsmembers decide. No reason there ought not be
straight bugle corps (and there ARE straight bugle sections - in
bands). As for me, I'd take 1965 as a starting point - because that's
all we're talking about, a starting point. And then corps may evolve
- but within the drum & bugle corps genre, and NOT towards band nor
for political reasons and the power, money and egos of a few...
>> I think that a single philosophical change might
>> turn it around: the only measure of success for
>> DCI and its member corps should be the number of
>> kids participating annually. The experience of
>> diverse kids growing together is the single
>> constant between junior corps of the 1940's and
>> junior corps today.
> This is a good thought. I will remember it.
Not that it will be all that important to you as a ruling value -
which is what Bill is talking about - a world in which "for the kids"
MEANS something GENUINE instead of merely a marketing tool (at best).
>> To maximize that number, DCI's actions should
>> be oriented toward reducing the income required
>> for each corps to compete; and getting back to
>> the basics of drums and bugles would be the most
>> obvious cost-reducing place to start. Reducing
>> the need for extensive national tours will
>> likewise reduce the income required. Unwinding
>> the season from six intensive weeks to a more
>> relaxed, near-year-round and continent-wide
>> activity would help. Finally, eliminating
>> compensation for consultants and creative people,
>> for a fixed period of say five years, would
>> level the playing field to a great degree.
> DCI can't do much about anything other than the tour.
Bullshit. DCI doesn't WANT to do much about anything - except what it
has done.
> There are real-world realities to deal with --
> the very real obstacle of having school
> schedules start in early August in some places,
> getting out around June 21st in other areas.
> The other decisions are very much up to the
> individual corps.
If a national tour no longer defines drum & bugle corps, but
participation of the kids (whether or not they have conflicts with HS
band programs), there goes your very real obstacle, Chuck.
Further, if band directors supported corps participation - because
they knew and understood it to be a valuable experience rather than
indoctrination into a bullying network that the band directors have to
worry about with regard to their own careers - it would be a win-win.
"All about the kids", Chuck - remember?
> Other than on the newsgroups, I do not see
> support for forming drum corps in communities.
> I certainly do not have the finances to start a
> drum corps in Ft. Collins, Colorado. It would
> fun to do. . . but I won't mortagage my house
> to do it.
Just your soul, right? (j/k - does that disclaimer save and protect
me from the responsibility too?)
I'll say it again - just your soul, right? I've said it to Wayne
Downey, after all....
"Funny" how my 1940's Ludwig manual details how ANY group can start up
a drum & bugle corps... "Funny" how DCI's "experts" left that out of
the equations of what constitutes "achievement" and "excellence"...
> Any suggestions?
I don't think you don't want to go there... But thanks for the
sincere invitation.
>> Mike D. said (words to this effect) that any
>> change reducing the entertainment value of the
>> "product" would "kill" the whole thing; but it
>> is the example of pipe band that belies his
>> words. Corps was far more popular when it was
>> "dead cats" playing chrome-plated bugles; and
>> every change to make corps more "musical" has
>> simply made it less popular and more elitist.
>>
>> -- bill
> At the risk of incurring the wrath of those older
> than me, my initial reaction is that the further
> back in time we go, the less sophisticated and
> more easily entertained the general population
> was.
Oh - now everyone isn't "educated" enough to "appreciate" the genkus
that DCI puts out on the field. I get it... heard it before though,
not very original Chuck.
> Put "Howdy Doody" on today. . . or "The Show of
> Shows". . . all those wonderful, and now nostalgic,
> shows. Would they get the same reaction?
Interesting choices, Chuck - a kid's show. Howzabout Charlie Chaplin?
Buster Keaton? The Three Stooges? I had this very discussion with a
young woman about the quality of entertainers then - she didn't
believe me either. I put on a Rat Pack video - singing, dancing,
impressions, and some very funny stuff that holds up REAL well.
I'll tell you what holds up - what was bando bullshit then is bando
bullshit now; what was mediocre then (and there was plenty) is
mediocre now - and I see a lot more mediocrity disguised as
"marketing", glitz and glamour, and less quality anything other than
the collective sad lessons we've learned as a people, THESE days....
But the pendulum will swing, as it does, and what are lies will be
forgotten (like much of DCI's truer history, fortunately for
EVERYONE). But drum corps people STILL want to see a military,
precise, LOUD drum & bugle corps, and a whole lot fewer people (and of
lesser quality, IMO) care about DCI.
> Maybe this isn't your point. If I'm in my
> own trap here thinking you want to turn back
> the clock, help me get unstuck.
You'd like to dismiss what Bill has written, and the lessons provided
in the here and now by pipe band enthusiasts, wouldn't you? So much
for a great and open educator, willing to teach on the merits and
advocate FOR the merits, instead of advocating what works to his own
self-interests. I've seen that a lot too, Chuck. You're in company,
even though I wouldn't call it good company.
Not suggesting litigation, trolling and the other things I get to
experience because I'm an outspoken critic of DCI - things I don't get
from open drum corps people - directed your way. I'm happy enough
calling you openly what I think you are - and persuading merely on the
power of my words, or not. Mediocrity is everwhere. And not all
mediocrities must elevate themselves at the expense of others, though,
and the encouragement of other lesser elements in society.
I'm more than happy to continue letting time tell... Oh, and in
knowing that in the desperation to not have to get an honest corporate
job, some people have reduced themselves to having a corrupt and
mediocre corporate job with VERY uncertain futures...
-- Catherine
> Chuck Naffier
<snip>
chucknaffier
If you'd like to continue this conversation, I'd be more than happy to.
However, if Ms. Burr speaks for you, we can just agree to call it a day. I
really am listening to you.
Catherine,
The most disheartening part of all this is how much you really could
offer -- but every time you get the chance, you are unable to avoid personal
attack.
As a result, frankly, it is difficult for me to care what you think.
Chuck Naffier
__________________
"Catherine" <cather...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:93e9a2e7.03021...@posting.google.com...
chucknaffier
If you'd like to continue this conversation, I'd be more than happy to.
However, if Ms. Burr speaks for you, we can just agree to call it a day. I
really am listening to you.
Catherine,
The most disheartening part of all this is how much you really could
offer -- but every time you get the chance, you are unable to avoid personal
attack.
As a result, frankly, it is difficult for me to care what you think.
Chuck Naffier
__________________
"Catherine" <cather...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:93e9a2e7.03021...@posting.google.com...
Catherine
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 20:51:27 GMT
> Bill,
> If you'd like to continue this conversation,
> I'd be more than happy to. However, if Ms. Burr
> speaks for you, we can just agree to call it a day.
> I really am listening to you.
Oh really? How did my commenting upon your conversation in any way
change what Bill had to say?
Are people required to disclaim anything or anyone in order to be
allowed their opinions, Chuck?
>Catherine,
> The most disheartening part of all this is how
> much you really could offer -- but every time
> you get the chance, you are unable to avoid
> personal attack.
How convenient - particularly since you and EVERYONE have no
substantive counterarguments.
Seems to me it wasn't long ago Mr. Naffier that you were more than
happy to stoop to what were CLEARLY personal attacks having nothing to
do with this activity - except to attempt to demoralize and discredit
a political opponent. Why do I think you weren't quite truly
repentant in your apology?
> As a result, frankly, it is difficult for me to
> care what you think.
Oh, yes you do... <$1 to Todd> ;^)
The very pleasant advantage I enjoy is that I don't have to
investigate nor maintain a manipulative network. All I have to do is
open my eyes, and not allow myself to be bought off by beers, personal
meetings and other forms of snake oil...
-- Catherine
chucknaffier
If your intent is to change my mind, make me see the light, or whatever it
is you are trying to do. . . then have at it. But if you think your current
method is getting you anywhere, or the drum corps activity for that matter.
. . best of luck to you.
I'll go another step further. If you can get 20 people on RAMD, or from
your past, or anyone you ever marched with, or any of your friends, to tell
me why I should give your words any credence, or to tell me that I have not
offered you enough opportunities to communicate in a straight-forward
manner. . . then I will make it my mission to get you back to 1965.
Chuck Naffier
"Catherine" <cather...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:93e9a2e7.03021...@posting.google.com...
Jr liberty
>Message-id: <jnd2a.71098$tq4.3465@sccrnsc01>
>
>Bill,
>
>If you'd like to continue this conversation, I'd be more than happy to.
>However, if Ms. Burr speaks for you, we can just agree to call it a day. I
>really am listening to you.
>
>
>Catherine,
>
>The most disheartening part of all this is how much you really could
>offer -- but every time you get the chance, you are unable to avoid personal
>attack.
>
>As a result, frankly, it is difficult for me to care what you think.
>
>
>
>Chuck Naffier
>
>__________________
To quote Rudyard Kipling: "You're a better man than I am, Gunga Din".
Jim Reilly
bill turner
"chucknaffier" <chuckn...@attbi.com> wrote:
> Bill,
>
> If you'd like to continue this conversation, I'd be more than happy to.
> However, if Ms. Burr speaks for you, we can just agree to call it a day. I
> really am listening to you.
Hmm. I thought we were exploring some useful areas; and I gave you
several concrete suggestions in another post.
Catherine speaks for herself, and I speak for myself. However it goes
against my "VK training" to be exclusionary. I think we're stronger when
we encourage and consider alternative voices and viewpoints. Certainly
it worked for VK, when she and I marched together.
-- bill
Stuart Rice
> Stuart Rice wrote:
>
> >"chucknaffier" <chuckn...@attbi.com> wrote in message news:<wsy1a.47039$iG3.5486@sccrnsc02>...
> >>"Richard V. Lamb" <prof...@frontiernet.net> wrote in message
> >>news:v4cj4kj...@corp.supernews.com...
> >>>"Sis" <sist...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> >>>news:3E460F1F...@worldnet.att.net...
> >>>[Hopkins wrote]:
> >>>> *We kept the name drum and bugle corps, even though we had no bugles.
> >(Still doesn't know what a bugle is. These are the people determining
> >creative restrictions in this activity.)
> >>>1. According to the New Harvard Dictionary of Music, the two-valve G horns
> >>>used in drum corps--even today--are bugles. If that dictionary had been
> >>>revised since 1990, it would probably list the three-valve G horns as
> >>>bugles, too. According to what is arguably the most authoritative source
> >>>of definitions in music, drum corps still has bugles!
> >>Please read the numerous posts and information supplied by Jeff Mitchell.
> >>We haven't played bugles in a very long time. . . just a hybrid.
> >We haven't sounded like drum corps in a very long time either.
> >>Getting caught up in semantics is a pointless exercise in futiliy
> >A bugle has a certain ratio of conical to cylindrical bore tubing.
> >Our ignorance about that ratio may be an unknown, but it is not a
> >matter of semantics. Its a matter of physics.
> >
> Would you care to provide some research that backs this up?
You research bugles and you don't know they have something to do with
physics? Geez, Jeff, even if you and the other bugle link on my
website hadn't folded, there'd be little I could do to enlighten you.
> There are two definitions for bugles that appear in the brass family.
> Much confusion has resulted when people confuse or connect them in
> discussion.
That's super, but we were discussing bugle physics before you jumped
in.
> The original instrument was derived from the horn of a young bull and
> was completely conical in nature. The French single wrap design (similar
> to the modern flugelhorn) and the british double compact design fall
> into this category. Then there are the variety of instruments that drum
> corps has defined as bugles since it's inception. The original "bugles"
> were, in fact, valveless field trumpets. The War Department's Technical
> Manual for Field Music, TM 20-250, dated 1940, makes that perfectly
> clear. (It also suggests an earlier date for band/corps interaction as
> the F slide was designated in 1892, when the US military ceased the use
> of calvary bugle.) Here is the definition from Uncle Sam;
>
> "General- The field trumpet is a military signal horn pitched in G and
> equipped with a tuning slide which may be used to adjust discrepancies
> of pitch between several instruments or drawn to the F mark for use with
> a band." Nowhere in this manual is the word bugle mentioned. Trumpet
> appears many times in this manual on an instrument labeled as a "US
> Regulation Bugle", so again another source for possible confusion.
All irrelevant without specs.
> The early soprano bugles of drum corps were field trumpets, valveless of
> course, and defined by their cylindrical nature as were the small
> baritones of that era. They, as the instruments of today, have a long
> history of outdoor usage. The constant defining characteristics of a
> bugle, in drum corps terms, is in the bell front design or the
> shape/look of the instrument, not in any ratio of tubing.
'...depends on where its pointing.' Pretty insulting.
> There is
> actually much variation in the ratio of conical to cylindrical tubing in
> the various bugle voices. At one extreme you have the highly cylindrical
> soprano and small bell baritone/trombonium and the highly conical
> flugelhorn and french horn at the other.
I'm sure we're all impressed with your citations and assertions, Jeff,
but as I mentioned the last time you got run over in this discussion,
its a waste of time without specifications. Do your own homework.
Stuart E. Rice
www.marchingresearch.com
Catherine
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 21:10:00 GMT
Tell ya what, Catherine. . . you have my email address.
If your intent is to change my mind, make me see the light, or
whatever it
is you are trying to do. . . then have at it. But if you think your
current
method is getting you anywhere, or the drum corps activity for that
matter.
. . best of luck to you.
I'll go another step further. If you can get 20 people on RAMD, or
from
your past, or anyone you ever marched with, or any of your friends, to
tell
me why I should give your words any credence, or to tell me that I
have not
offered you enough opportunities to communicate in a straight-forward
manner. . . then I will make it my mission to get you back to 1965.
Chuck Naffier
***********************************
Sorry Chuck. You and I have already gone the e-mail route. I already
know what a dead-end path that is. But isn't that what trolls do?
Build up and/or exploit people's hopes and then drop them? It's why
so much effort is being expended - up to today - in getting ME to drop
it, to "prove" me a troll when more and more people know very well
otherwise...
Tell ya what, Chuck - here's a suggestion for YOU - you go back and
answer my questions in a form that a decent educator being asked
sincere questions by their students would answer. Make them
"excellent" - come on, SHOW us how much you know about these subject
and persuade us on the merits instead of the usual load of DCI
apologist bullshit. Let the apparent truth shine through your words -
without the personal charm, or the persuasion of a corps membership
and individuals' hopes and dreams about what their drum corps season
that is costing them and their family so much will be like...
For me to trust you assumes I have any respect for you on the merits -
and I don't. I don't need you at all to approve of my methods or my
life. Nor do "I" need my friends to stand up for me so that you can
go after them as well. My words stand alone - all the effort you and
EVERYONE have expended on RAMD and off fully detail that.
There's no way you or George Hopkins are going to give up your resume
credits and empires to do the right thing. You would do the right
thing ON YOUR OWN if you genuinely believed in it. And you quit
believing in it - if you ever did - a whole helluva long time ago...
I must say that you and Wayne Downey both dress such shit up a whole
lot nicer than most people. But it's still shit. I'd rather not
subject my friends to your "help". You can believe or care about that
as you like - not that you need my permission to do so...
-- Catherine
Jeff
Jeff
Mike Poche
>"bill turner" <bill_ge...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:bill_gets_stuff-85...@orngca-news03.socal.rr.com...
>> If I might stick my nose in,
>
>
>Hi Bill,
>
>Consider your nose stuck. . . :-)
< raising hand>
May I stick mine in also ?
>> When people ask me to play "Happy Birthday" at a party, I don't extoll
>> the virtues of Beethoven's "Hammerclavier." When *I'm* the
>> entertainment, I play what folks want to hear.
>
>
>Indeed, I asked about more popular programming, which (I assume) is one of
>the arguments against today's drum corps? Or am I mistaken?
From the people and KIDS I talk to, that seems to be the main problem
concerning the lack of interest.
Do I like large pits ?
NO
Do I like multi key over G ?
NO
Do I like the lack of attention to guard work and equipment ?
NO
But I can live with all of the above if it went back to being about
entertainment instead of technical capabilities.
I don't like sitting in a concert hall and I'll be damned if I'm going to sit
in a stadium without getting goosebumps and standing up and cheering.
Hell, at least at DCA when you find something boring, you can go sit at the bar
and have a drink while waiting for something more entertaining. ( sometimes the
conversation at the bar is VERY entertaining )
I stopped going to DCI finals because I felt paying the bucks for the ticket
plus the trip was too much to only be entertained by a very few corps. Now,
I'm not sure if I'll even go to any DCI shows once amps come into play.
If things were so much easier back say around 80, why not have a modern drill
done to an old ENTERTAINING show. Yes, I can hear the intonation problems with
the corps from 80, but I hear a lot of emotion that I don't hear with "most" of
todays shows.
Bill brings up a good point about the national tours. Maybe it's time to go
back to regional tours and just one short push to finals. Maybe more people
would go to finals if it was the only time to see all the corps ?
snip........
>Interesting. In the unlikely event that drum corps would decide to return
>to its roots, which roots would we return to? The '50's? The 80's? Not
>trying to be a jerk about this. . . but lets say you have the power right
>now to turn back the clock. What time is it?
2003, but do shows to impact the people in the stands, if you can't get them
off their butts at least 10 times in a show, the design team has failed.
>Other than on the newsgroups, I do not see support for forming drum corps in
>communities. I certainly do not have the finances to start a drum corps in
>Ft. Collins, Colorado. It would fun to do. . . but I won't mortagage my
>house to do it.
>
>Any suggestions?
Bingo ? :-)
>At the risk of incurring the wrath of those older than me, my initial
>reaction is that the further back in time we go, the less sophisticated and
>more easily entertained the general population was. Put "Howdy Doody" on
>today. . . or "The Show of Shows". . . all those wonderful, and now
>nostalgic, shows. Would they get the same reaction?
Depends on the arrangement doesn't it ?
( rimshot )
>Maybe this isn't your point. If I'm in my own trap here thinking you want
>to turn back the clock, help me get unstuck.
>
How about the best of ALL eras ?
Is that too much to ask for ?
The OTHER Mike
2002 gRAMDie Best New Smartass of the Year
Jeff Ream
then do you? the ones who spend hundreds a year on DCI. and not just finals.
local shows...now all run by DCI mind you. regionals. cds. dvds. videos. you
name it.
>Subject: Re: DCI PRESENTATION UNCOVERED
>From: "chucknaffier" chuckn...@attbi.com
>Date: 2/11/2003 1:46 PM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <yyb2a.67319$2H6.1224@sccrnsc04>
Jeff Ream
I'll but you beer for life if we can get back to say 79-96ish.
thanks.
>Subject: Re: DCI PRESENTATION UNCOVERED
>From: "chucknaffier" chuckn...@attbi.com
>Date: 2/11/2003 4:10 PM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <IEd2a.71232$tq4.2332@sccrnsc01>
Catherine
<snip>
> Sadly, some members and fans bought it, hook
> line and sinker, or supported the gibberish
> in order to hype the real agenda, spelled
> out in the presentation at hand.
And many staff members and "approved" persons laughed at the
gullibility, er... "naivete" and sincerity of those who bought it, and
the genkus of those who hawked the snake oil - through exploiting
those who wanted to believe...
> Glad to see the rabbit is finally out of the hat
> and on the table.
Agreed. It was inevitable.
> Having said that, I have to wonder why the activity
> as a whole looks to these people for leadership
> when it's clear these folks no longer believe in
> the product they're being paid to produce.
The only consistent answer is that they are perfectly happy meeting
their true goals - exploiting drum & bugle corps for profit, whether
for reasons of ego and/or $$$. This is known as "maximizing the
values of the assets in favor of the stockholders" - the corporate
model that "experts" sold drum & bugle corps people on.
<snip>
> If drum corps is the Catholic Church, as the
> presentation states, then a number of the
> Cardinals [not just Monsignor Hopkins] have
> completely lost their faith. It's clear they
> need to go join the church they believe in,
> the sooner the better.
I think the Mafia (particularly wannabe comic book versions of the
same) is a more apt analogy - particularly the parts about the
necessity of keeping one's family and those private matters private
and completely separate from what one does for a "living", such as it
is.
If there were full, verifiable and accountable disclosure, there would
be no rackets. And without genuineness, there can be no possibility
of excellence - or drum & bugle corps. While I don't accuse everyone
of being a part of EVERYONE, all those who turn away from open
scrutiny prove their enabling of this system. I kept my head in the
sand for a long time - and know now how I was "encouraged" to do so.
When things are so bad that there exists a network of apologists, and
trolls and threats the first and repeated responses, one knows how
really bad things really are.
Hopkins is a "leader" because he gets off on such things. It's a
particularly EEBBUBery trait, and far from excellence...
-- Catherine
<snip>
chucknaffier
> In article <jnd2a.71098$tq4.3465@sccrnsc01>,
> "chucknaffier" <chuckn...@attbi.com> wrote:
>
> > Bill,
> >
> > If you'd like to continue this conversation, I'd be more than happy to.
> > However, if Ms. Burr speaks for you, we can just agree to call it a day.
I
> > really am listening to you.
>
> Hmm. I thought we were exploring some useful areas; and I gave you
> several concrete suggestions in another post.
Agreed. And I am following up on the things we talked about.
I sincerely thank you for your suggestions. I'd like to keep the lines
open.
> Catherine speaks for herself, and I speak for myself. However it goes
> against my "VK training" to be exclusionary. I think we're stronger when
> we encourage and consider alternative voices and viewpoints. Certainly
> it worked for VK, when she and I marched together.
Okay.
Chuck
chucknaffier
So.
If I'm not worth your time, why do you keep wasting your time? Certainly a
woman as wise as you wouldn't knowingly waste her time. Yet, you persist.
And. . . you continue to turn down opportunities.
Is this what it's really all about? You thought you had a new friend, only
to find out I don't believe what you believe? And now you feel betrayed?
When in reality, you never invested anything in any sort of friendship or
any other type of relationship. . . and only expressed any interest in me at
all when it looked like I might be another person to share secrets with?
Hmmm. . .
If you don't want to waste your time with me anymore, don't respond. If you
continue to respond, certainly you choose to waste your own time. By your
standards.
Goodnight Gracie,
Chuck Naffier
"Catherine" <cather...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:93e9a2e7.03021...@posting.google.com...
chucknaffier
I'd have to say you owe me beer as I continue with the Crossmen, and the
things I helped with during my time with the Colts.
I will do what I can, and I daresay you will like the show I am a part of
this year. If not. . . I'll be the one buying the beers.
Regarding the rest of the activity. . . one can lead. . . but one cannot
force others to follow.
Chuck Naffier
"Jeff Ream" <jeffs...@aol.comspamthis> wrote in message
news:20030211180245...@mb-cf.aol.com...
chucknaffier
I'd have to say you owe me beer as I continue with the Crossmen, and the
things I helped with during my time with the Colts.
I will do what I can, and I daresay you will like the show I am a part of
this year. If not. . . I'll be the one buying the beers.
Regarding the rest of the activity. . . one can lead. . . but one cannot
force others to follow.
Chuck Naffier
"Jeff Ream" <jeffs...@aol.comspamthis> wrote in message
news:20030211180245...@mb-cf.aol.com...
U82m
>Regarding the rest of the activity. . . one can lead. . . but one cannot
>force others to follow.
>
>Chuck Naffier
Funny. But, if no one is following, that's not leadership. Oh well. Chuck,
here's hoping your arrangements are as pleasing in '03 as they were in '02.
Bill
MC
Sis wrote:
> Yeah? I think that when drum corps was delivered into the hands of
> DCI and the Directors of the drum corps that would make the
> decisions for drum corps that it was done so with the trust that DCI
> and drum corps directors would do whatever it took to protect the
> activity and not deliver it into the hands of another activity? No?
If you're talking 1972, yes. But those guys aren't running the
corps or the activity these days.
> Didn't they? Weren't they going to save drum corps from
> the American Legion and the CYO?
Again, the original guys, yes. The current management, no.
Most of them took over a decade or more after DCI was founded.
I'm not positive, but I don't believe any of the original
guys still act in a management role on a day to day basis.
If you look at what caused the formation of DCI, it had
more to do with artistic freedom and control than adhering
to traditional VFW/AL drum corps. It more closely matches
the current artist first mindset. An instance of history
repeating itself.
The first move was away from VFW/AL, this one is away from
drum corps to MB - both using artistic and creative freedom
as a central point.
As for the original DCI charter, the most info I can come
up with is the following exchange between Frank Schoenbach
and George Hopkins.
> No, I don't think treason implies marching bands are the
> enemy, Mike. Treason in the sense of the word where someone
> is given the authority and trust of the membership
> of the organization; to betray that trust, is just that.
I don't think you'll find many YEA fans or members who believe
their trust has been betrayed. The problem for me with using
"treason" lies in the idea that DCI is = a government, or that
the current leaders have suddenly changed positions.
Additionally I find the term treason to be over dramatic.
That's just me.
> The alternative isn't the enemy.
I was referring to the "Bando" line of attack so often used
when this topic comes up. I don't think it serves a purpose
beyond creating an "us vs. them" mentality that doesn't exist
if you listen to the MB members as opposed to the leadership.
My comments weren't directed to you or your posts, but to the
"anti-bando" sentiments in general. Sorry I didn't make that clear.
> I ask you Michael, what can we do about it? I am all ears!
As others have said, not attending shows will get attention.
It's drastic, but what other real leverage do fans have with
leadership that won't listen to contrary opinions?
If their projections are true, it won't leave a dent because
they'll have plenty of folks to replace those leaving. I say
call the bluff. It sucks for the members who are pawns in
the game, but there really aren't options left. Clearly the
guys in charge aren't interested in compromise.
In addition, getting petitions from MB members would make it
clear the new market isn't interested in duplication, despite
all the claims that they are. I think that's the case, but
until someone polls them we'll never know for sure.
> I'm not entirely sure what you are trying to say. Both sides as in
> "drum corps" and "marching band" should make it clear to the guys
> calling the shots that these changes aren't wanted or needed?
Exactly.
> I won't speak for marching band because I don't much care what their
> opinion is. They can continue to express it on the band newsgroup if
> they'd like and I don't really care one way or another how they feel
> about it.
But that is ignoring what I believe is a sizable number of people who
feel the same way you do. They don't want the changes for many of the
same reasons the "dinosaurs" don't.
If the leadership hears "no thanks" from the very members these
changes are supposed to draw, that's a good deal different from
the same posts from the same "legacy" fans they're already
ignoring.
Regards,
Michael Cahill
Matt Mingle
>
>Tell ya what, Chuck - here's a suggestion for YOU - you go back and
>answer my questions in a form that a decent educator being asked
>sincere questions by their students would answer. Make them
>"excellent" - come on, SHOW us how much you know about these subject
>and persuade us on the merits instead of the usual load of DCI
>apologist bullshit. Let the apparent truth shine through your words -
>without the personal charm, or the persuasion of a corps membership
>and individuals' hopes and dreams about what their drum corps season
>that is costing them and their family so much will be like...
>
>For me to trust you assumes I have any respect for you on the merits -
>and I don't. I don't need you at all to approve of my methods or my
>life. Nor do "I" need my friends to stand up for me so that you can
>go after them as well. My words stand alone - all the effort you and
>EVERYONE have expended on RAMD and off fully detail that.
<snip>
>There's no way you or George Hopkins are going to give up your resume
>credits and empires to do the right thing. You would do the right
>thing ON YOUR OWN if you genuinely believed in it. And you quit
>believing in it - if you ever did - a whole helluva long time ago...
>-- Catherine
>
>
While I know the dangers of posting to this dialogue and understand that 99% of
the people here do not question Chuck's "merits" as a teacher, I just wanted to
share a brief thought.
While someone might disagree with what drum corps is or isn't today, the
marching members of DCI (I speak only for my experience in 2002) believe that
they are marching drum corps. Did I refer to my horn as a trumpet last summer?
Yes. Did it change the root of my experience marching with a drum corps? I
don't think so. I marched 1999-2001 and will march 2003 in a G only
hornline...the experience is still the same. The passion, the pain, and the
intensity of it all is still the same. But I digress.
While Chuck was not with us every single day of tour, the impact he had when he
was there was enormous. Anyone who doubts his ability to arrange music for
drum corps to excite a crowd and produce an energized performance must have
been grabbing a hot dog when the Crossmen performed in 2000, 2001, and 2002.
Anyone who doubts his ability to help create amazing performers have never seen
him work. Many speak of stripping DCI of the ultra-elite music major face it
seems to be developing. Watch the 2002 Crossmen tour video. Watch the segment
that took place the morning of semifinals when Chuck stood in front of the horn
arc and talked about playing with emotion and heart and soul and forgetting
about the technical side and perfection and just going onto the field and
performing. Then watch the next segment run-through and the seminfinals
performance. Wow...intense! I invite anyone who doesn't believe in Chuck's
"merits" to contact me by email. If you pay for postage, I will send you the
2002 Crossmen tour DVD so you can see for yourself....(just get it back to me
within a week or I'll be pretty unhappy).
Sorry for the length...
Matt Mingle
Drum Corps Radio, Host
www.drumcorpsradio.org
Sis
> <snipped to the chase>
>
> > The alternative isn't the enemy.
>
> I was referring to the "Bando" line of attack so often used
> when this topic comes up. I don't think it serves a purpose
> beyond creating an "us vs. them" mentality that doesn't exist
> if you listen to the MB members as opposed to the leadership.
Most people that I know use the "bando" word to mean a drum corps person
who thinks that drum corps should be bands, not a member of a band.
>
>
> My comments weren't directed to you or your posts, but to the
> "anti-bando" sentiments in general. Sorry I didn't make that clear.
Again, bandos are drum corps people who want drum corps to be marching
bands. Not the band members themselves. Maybe a better word could be
used for the distinction. Is F***ing A**holes already taken? ;-)
>
>
> > I ask you Michael, what can we do about it? I am all ears!
>
> As others have said, not attending shows will get attention.
> It's drastic, but what other real leverage do fans have with
> leadership that won't listen to contrary opinions?
Precisely what I'm asking.
>
>
> If their projections are true, it won't leave a dent because
> they'll have plenty of folks to replace those leaving. I say
> call the bluff. It sucks for the members who are pawns in
> the game, but there really aren't options left. Clearly the
> guys in charge aren't interested in compromise.
Definitely. It won't be my money paying for the ban....ah....f***ing
a**holes to try their band experiment. ;-)
>
>
> In addition, getting petitions from MB members would make it
> clear the new market isn't interested in duplication, despite
> all the claims that they are. I think that's the case, but
> until someone polls them we'll never know for sure.
That sounds like a job for someone who is involved in both groups. I'm
not.
Surely someone we know would be able to do that.
>
> <snip>
>
> > I won't speak for marching band because I don't much care what their
> > opinion is. They can continue to express it on the band newsgroup if
> > they'd like and I don't really care one way or another how they feel
> > about it.
>
> But that is ignoring what I believe is a sizable number of people who
> feel the same way you do. They don't want the changes for many of the
> same reasons the "dinosaurs" don't.
Good point, Michael. Not that I think it has any more chance of being
listened to then the complaints from the dinosaurs. I'm not involved in
any marching band groups so that would be left up to someone else.
Someone who can related to marching bands.
>
>
> If the leadership hears "no thanks" from the very members these
> changes are supposed to draw, that's a good deal different from
> the same posts from the same "legacy" fans they're already
Well, at least it's a new group to ignore, anyway.
Nice to see you around, Michael.
Jackie
sgordon
: If things were so much easier back say around 80, why not have a
: modern drill done to an old ENTERTAINING show.
Because there is no reason to. There is no payoff in terms of score
to produce an entertaining show. The requirement is to produce an
"effective" show. So in terms of entertainment, the effort is better
placed elsewhere if the goal is winning. It's like asking, "why don't
they pass out ice cream bars?"
: 2003, but do shows to impact the people in the stands, if you can't
: get them off their butts at least 10 times in a show, the design
: team has failed.
Here, I think there is a bit of a disconnect... most design teams have
interpreted the above to mean, if you don't do something explosive
every 30 seconds, you've failed. That's one reason there are big BOPs
all over the place, even during ballads, and constant tempo changes rather
than grooves. Making TRULY exciting music requires musical development
and the willingness to establish an exciting groove. Get the people
in the stands roped into the music and movin' with you! It can be a
ballad, a latin piece, or an opera... either way, it takes some time to
establish a mood and develop a piece. Don't chop it up! The older
corps used to groove like crazy!
One measure of how exciting a corps is, is how much the crowd is
cheering. An equal measure is if you can hear a pin drop (followed
of course by wild cheering).
Scott
Sis
>Mike Poche <bleur...@aol.com> wrote:
>: If things were so much easier back say around 80, why not have a
>: modern drill done to an old ENTERTAINING show.
>
>Because there is no reason to. There is no payoff in terms of score
>to produce an entertaining show. The requirement is to produce an
>"effective" show. So in terms of entertainment, the effort is better
>placed elsewhere if the goal is winning. It's like asking, "why don't
>they pass out ice cream bars?"
>
>
Puddin' pops worked for the Ho Ho Kus Yo Yo's! ;-)
Jackie
>
>
Stuart Rice
> So to make it brief, you have no research to support your contentions
> and resort to personal attacks in lieu of knowledge of the subject material.
I apologize if you felt my "attacks" were "personal." However, you're
right - I've presented no more "research" on bugle specifications here
than you have. As someone who doesn't profess to be a student of this
subject, I'm OK with that.
Stuart E. Rice
www.marchingresearch.com
Catherine
Message-ID: <Kpg2a.69287$2H6.1176@sccrnsc04>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 00:18:50 GMT
>>Okay.
So.
If I'm not worth your time, why do you keep wasting your time?
Certainly a
woman as wise as you wouldn't knowingly waste her time. Yet, you
persist.<<
I don't know that I'm wise - that's your characterization.
The persona "Chuck Naffier" posts words. I reply to the words as I
choose. At first, I wasn't sure if the man behind the words would be
a waste of time or not. Now, my only concern are the words...
>>And. . . you continue to turn down opportunities.<<
I don't feel any of the opportunities are genuine at this time.
>>Is this what it's really all about?<<
I wouldn't presume to know your mind, Mr. Naffier.
>>You thought you had a new friend, only to find out I don't believe
what you believe? And now you feel betrayed?<<
I never thought you a friend. As I have stated, one of my
prerequisites for friendship is knowing someone in person. You and I
have never even met. Thus, it's an impossibility under my definitions
and standards. Nor have you ever betrayed me personally; you and I
never had an understanding to betray - that I know of....
>>When in reality, you never invested anything in any sort of
friendship or
any other type of relationship. . . and only expressed any interest in
me at
all when it looked like I might be another person to share secrets
with?<<
Sorry, Mr. Naffier. As I remember the correspondence, I wasn't the
one worried about any secrets or opinions I didn't want broadcasted.
My opinions are very well known - there's no dissonance there.
Besides, if you ever seriously thought I was someone merely interested
in sharing secrets, why would you be interested in ME in any way?
>>Hmmm. . .
If you don't want to waste your time with me anymore, don't respond.<<
I don't waste my time with you at all.
>>If you continue to respond, certainly you choose to waste your own
time. By your standards.<<
You don't speak for my standards either. You, too, have lousy
translation skills. As for why you even try, I have my own ideas
about that...
<snip>
-- Catherine
Catherine
Date: 12 Feb 2003 01:12:34 GMT
Message-ID: <20030211201234...@mb-bd.aol.com>
<snip>
I don't know Chuck Naffier. But I do know Wayne Downey, and have been
in his hornline and observed him "teach" for the past 24 years.
I have no doubt that such experiences are enjoyable and even valuable,
for some more than others.
I can also understand how you might feel there's not much of a
difference between your G DCI hornline experience and your multikey
experience. But there's no comparison between how the experience was
between then and now, Matt. Sorry. Amazingly, many people are able
to nearly duplicate some of their old experiences. There *is* more
involved than merely the key of the instrument; but the key of the
instrument is part of an experience far larger.
Nor is it a merely a case of drum & bugle corps. A few of my friends
were my instructors then. Some of us are still playing, some as
corpsmembers, band members and other performers. Some of us have
taught, some of us are taught.
DCI sucks compared to the sorts of corps/staff experiences I'm talkin'
about. The difference is one not necessarily connected to what drum &
bugle corps was/is; but is FAR more likely to be found in corps as
opposed to DCI bando corps/marching band, for many organizational
structural reasons. Add the politics of today compared to yesterday,
add the difference between marching with corpspeople (rookies and
mostly years-long vets alike) and marching with bandos, and stir...
-- Catherine
Catherine
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 03:34:23 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.89.173.74
>> MC wrote:
> <snipped to the chase>
> > > The alternative isn't the enemy.
>
>> I was referring to the "Bando" line of attack so
>> often used when this topic comes up. I don't think
>> it serves a purpose beyond creating an "us vs. them"
>> mentality that doesn't exist if you listen to the
>> MB members as opposed to the leadership.
>Most people that I know use the "bando" word to mean
>a drum corps person
or a bando disguised as a drum corps person
>who thinks that drum corps should be bands, not a
>member of a band.
Precisely. The term "bando" as used in the drum & bugle corps world
(at least by me) has absolutely no force or meaning as used in the
marching band world - except perhaps to describe a band person's
tactics in the world of drum & bugle corps. There's nothing wrong
with band and band people who value who and what they are. I've
played in band now myself, and will be continuing with that more and
more.
>> My comments weren't directed to you or your posts,
>> but to the "anti-bando" sentiments in general. Sorry
>> I didn't make that clear.
> Again, bandos are drum corps people who want drum corps
> to be marching bands. Not the band members themselves.
> Maybe a better word could be used for the distinction.
> Is F***ing A**holes already taken? ;-)
That's a good one. Wannabes, neverweres, mediocrities, EEBBUBery
types... it's all good.
-- Catherine
<snip>
Richard V. Lamb
"Levi Boldt" <bold...@pilot.msu.edu> wrote in message
news:3E47F39B...@pilot.msu.edu...
> chucknaffier wrote:
>
> >> George still doesn't seem to understand why Levi Boldt gave him a
writing
> >> guide back in 1997!
>
> > What does this have to do with anything?
>
>
> Good question, Chuck. I thought it was just a funny gag gift... almost
> worth lugging the thing around on tour until we had a show with the
> Cadets!
It was a *great* gag gift! It was also a wonderful RAMD moment that Whitney
and I won't forget. In fact, we were talking about it just the other day.
> >> Corps have used costuming since the Madison Scouts in 1970 (Alice in
> >> Wonderland show). As for the part about the money--as my favorite .sig
of
> >> Levi Boldt's said: "Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but
most
> >> of the time he will pick himself up and continue." - Winston Churchill.
> >> Hey, George, have a nice trip. See you next fall!
>
> I detect a trend. Gee Vince, if you're gonna name-drop wouldn't you want
> to do that with an established and universally respected name, not just
> some schmuck that had way too much free time on his hands when he was in
> college?
Well, I was name-dropping both your name and Winston Churchill's. Your name
has become the famous person's link to RAMD. After all, did anyone else
quote him as often as you did? Besides, you've been missed!
What surprised me even more than you posting was that your MSU address is
still valid! How'd you manage that? Still in Wisconsin?
> Levi Boldt
Vince
Jeff Ream
and i'll be at too many DCA shows to catch ya.
:)
>Subject: Re: DCI PRESENTATION UNCOVERED
>From: "chucknaffier" chuckn...@attbi.com
>Date: 2/11/2003 7:24 PM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <vvg2a.70799$iG3.9093@sccrnsc02>
Jeff Ream
Steve Lucas
> funny...i went to the BOA forums...man those kida are anti A&E in drum corps.
> Jeff Ream
I checked out those forums. What I saw amounted to about 7 or 8 posts
regarding the rule changes. Approximately 25-30 people participated in
those posts, adding up to around 100 actual responses. And apart from
6 or 7 really angry people who seemed to monopolize the conversations with
multiple posts back and forth, the rest were either indifferent, against
it but willing to give it a shot, or actually defending it (admittedly,
not many). Either way, I saw way more posts there about totally unrelated
band/corps topics (NCAA hoops, Saddam Hussein, the Space Shuttle, the
Super Bowl, etc). I did see one post about signing a petition, but that
had to do with the recent BOA rule change about scoring in Grand Nats.
Incidently, there were tons more posts in outrage about that than anything
going in DCI.
MC
Steve Lucas wrote:
> I checked out those forums. What I saw amounted to about 7 or
> 8 posts regarding the rule changes.
7 or 8 posts, or 7 or 8 topics?
Check the archives as well. It may be harder to do, but I
recall the same lack of interest or opposition when amps
and electronics were proposed last year. If I get more free
time I'll look it up.
> Approximately 25-30 people participated in those posts, adding up to
> around 100 actual responses. And apart from 6 or 7 really
> angry people who seemed to monopolize the conversations with
> multiple posts back and forth, the rest were either indifferent,
> against it but willing to give it a shot, or actually
> defending it (admittedly, not many).
Why aren't they more excited? This is the group that is
going to come to drum corps in droves once the gear is
added, according to YEA, BD, DCI, etc.
Why isn't there rejoicing on that board now that
drum corps is one step closer to MB?
What's particularly interesting is the overall lack of
support for woodwinds and electronics any time the issue
comes up. My personal favorites are those opposing woodwinds,
written by wind players. I was led to believe only the old
dinosaurs in drum corps were against it.
> Either way, I saw way more posts there about totally unrelated
> band/corps topics (NCAA hoops, Saddam Hussein, the Space Shuttle,
> the Super Bowl, etc).
True.
> I did see one post about signing a petition, but that
> had to do with the recent BOA rule change about scoring
> in Grand Nats.
Apparently the DCI BOD isn't alone in having trouble listening
to their constituents.
Interesting link from that:
http://www.petitiononline.com/
Anyone interested in setting up an amplification petition
to test the waters of both drum corps and marching band?
Regards,
Michael Cahill
Sis
There is an interesting discussion of amplification of drum corps on the
Dave Matthews newsgroup!
Jackie
Catherine
> From: Sis <sist...@worldnet.att.net>
> Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 03:34:23 GMT
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.89.173.74
>
>
> > Again, bandos are drum corps people who want drum corps
> > to be marching bands. Not the band members themselves.
> > Maybe a better word could be used for the distinction.
> > Is F***ing A**holes already taken? ;-)
>
> That's a good one. Wannabes, neverweres, mediocrities, EEBBUBery
> types... it's all good.
Just got another one: Ultimate Phonies.
-- Catherine
> <snip>
Steve Lucas
> Steve Lucas wrote:
>
> > I checked out those forums. What I saw amounted to about 7 or
> > 8 posts regarding the rule changes.
>
> 7 or 8 posts, or 7 or 8 topics?
7 or 8 topics with about 100 or so posts made by about 25-30 people.
Lots of bickering back and forth. I did check the archives and dug
through ten or twelve pages of topics and went back a few weeks before
the rules were voted upon to the time when the proposals were posted
on the DCI website. From what I was hearing on RAMD, there was supposed
to be a noticable and vociferous outrage and that's what I expected to
find. Unless I completely missed it, I didn't find it to be that huge
of a deal on those forums as I was led to believe.
Jeff
http://www.tapsbugler.com/HistoryoftheBugle/HistoryoftheBugle1.html
And for specifics of the M1892 Field Trumpet;
http://www.tapsbugler.com/HistoryoftheBugle/OriginsoftheM1892page1.html
However be forewarned that you will once again be confronted with the reality that "a bugle has a conical shape through-out" and that means your contention that "a bugle has a certain ratio of conical to cylindrical bore tubing" is inaccurate and false, given that a bugle has no cylindrical bore tubing. Also the reality that the M1892 US Regulation Bugle, the model for all valveless and single piston valve bugles in drum corps, is a field trumpet will be presented with bugle specifications by noted bugle historian, Jack Carter. He is credited in the new Drum Corps History book and is one of the foremost authorities on US military bugles and field trumpets on the planet.
For anyone else reading, this is a great new bugle website and I'll be updating mine later this winter.
Jeff
http://home.hvc.rr.com/jmitchell1/
Sharcast2
LEVI!!!!!!!!! How are you?
Great to see you posting!
Sharon
Richard V. Lamb
available and the mood and muse strike me. Until then, I'll post this item
about another activity which is having an identity and marketing crisis. At
least *this* activity isn't about to morph into another activity--it will
still be recognizable as what it was before even if the transition is fully
implimented. It's not as if racing funny cars on a drag strip (NHRA) will
become stock car racing (NASCAR) even though the vehicles look alike on the
outside and NASCAR is more popular and widely recognized. :->
Warning--there is plenty of ammunition here for *both* sides of the
argument, along with a possible solution. Read, enjoy, and think hard about
the similarities and differences!
For non-profit, discussion and public information purposes only:
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.03/
Wired! Issue 11.03 - March 2003
War of the Wheels
It's by-the-book, raw-horsepower muscle cars vs. screw-the-rules, high-tech
"rice burners." The battle for the soul of the hot rod is on.
By Cole Coonce
Pacoima, California October 2002
Glenoaks Boulevard cuts through the most neglected section of Los Angeles.
Taco trucks, shattered glass, and murals from a parallel pop-art universe
abut the harsh asphalt. Junkyards line the street. Hulks of luxury coupes,
grocery getters, and muscle cars are stacked like pallets to rust in the
smog, heaped in their own obsolescence.
The sun drops; and in a night sky smeared with tar, rottweilers bark and
cell phones ring. A gaggle of Nipponese Nissan boys face east and hold down
the front end of a ZX, taming the nitrous-assisted, 300-horsepower
mechanical steed while the meat in the seat applies both throttle and brake.
The front tires chirp like bio-mechanoidal bluebirds. It's a burnout, but
unlike the rear-wheel-drive cars of yesteryear, the front tires are smoking,
not the back ones. In the fumes, a handful of cholos gather around a Toyota
Supra. They - and the car - are also facing east (albeit on the side of the
street that flows west) and oblivious to the threat of oncoming traffic.
The young racers sport wife-beaters and military buzz cuts. Flanking them
are halter-topped honeys with long, two-tone hair. These are the Slo-Pokes,
a front-wheel-drive car club whose members meet after midnight to test the
limits of their twin-turbo ZXs, Supras, Civics, and Sentras.
I ask one of the crew why he risks running on the street instead of going to
a track. A zero-tolerance street-racing policy means cars can be
confiscated. He rattles off a litany of reasons: "'Cuz it's illegal, it's
free, and if you're fast you can win some quick dough." His conclusion:
"Fuck a legal track."
I ask another Slo-Poke to single out his trickest piece of kit. I figure
he'll point to his titanium valve springs or adjustable cam gears. No, he
tells me, it's his nitrous oxide system, which he ordered online. "I don't
have to open the hood to get dope," he says with a grin. He just has to push
the red button on his steering wheel - and hope the burst of thermodynamic
energy doesn't melt the pistons.
This is the PlayStation Generation, Gran Turismo-istas huffing exhaust. The
drivers stare each other down, and engines rev in anticipation of a quick
launch, but suddenly the race is aborted. It's time to vamoose after a rumor
circulates on the blinking and squeaking cell phones that the LAPD is
rolling close. Kids yell, run to their high-pitched, high-revving cars, and
make their getaways. Minutes later, the trebly culture makes a rendezvous at
a nearby Denny's and plots another go.
The scene in Pacoima repeats itself most weekends in the industrial
outskirts of nearly every burg in the country. The kids are drag racing:
marking off a quarter-mile of road and betting on the winner.
It's an American tradition that dates back to the greasers of the '50s.
Today there's a resurgence of interest in this dangerous ritual. The sleeper
hit of 2001, The Fast and the Furious made Vin Diesel a hot Hollywood
commodity by tapping into the automotive underground. Last summer's Diesel
vehicle XXX, the forthcoming Fast and the Furious 2, and the new Torque are
further stoking the fresh need for speed. Closer to where the rubber meets
the road, the Specialty Equipment Market Association reports that the
high-performance aftermarket for street racers is exploding. It's a $2.25
billion industry, up nearly 50 percent from 2001, and 90 percent from 2000.
The National Hot Rod Association, drag racing's de facto governing body,
would seem to have the most to gain from this up-from-the-streets
car-culture renaissance. The audience for sanctioned drag racing is graying;
new blood might attract a whole new demographic. There is one big problem,
however: In the name of mechanical purity, the NHRA has essentially outlawed
modern automotive technology on its fastest machines. Its 300-mph funny cars
have no software, no engine mapping, no rpm sensors, and no variable valve
timing (VTEC, in Honda's nomenclature). All this tech is banned at the
track, even though it's basic stuff, found on any showroom floor.
The only "computer" allowed on the strip is a pneumatically controlled
difference engine that governs how much fuel is routed to the cylinders and
how much horsepower is applied to the rear tires. A timer starts when the
driver stomps on the throttle, and blasts of compressed air course through a
configurable series of mechanical logic gates that vary the fuel/air ratio,
spark plug timing, and clutch grip according to a fixed sequence tailored to
race conditions. It's binary logic worthy of the Big Bad Wolf: A puff of air
is 1, no air is 0.
The rule is that there can be no "closed loop" systems in the cars - neither
the fuel nor air curves, nor the spark timing, may be modified by, say,
crankshaft speed. An IBM punchcard would be an advance.
On the street, where there are no rules, kids are "chipping" their rides:
dropping in off-the-shelf engine control modules that jack up performance.
They're installing nitrous oxide systems, a cheater's technology on the
track. They prefer Japanese cars - dismissed as "rice burners" by
connoisseurs of Detroit iron.
Drag racing is now two distinct and disparate automotive cultures: the V-8
Dinosaurs thundering down the legal tracks and the PS2 Babies staging outlaw
rallies on the street.
Yielding to the new paradigm means more than just upgrading a few rules. It
means junking the pushrod engine that has dominated drag racing for decades:
Mopar's 426-cubic-inch Hemi V-8. Some would suggest this move is long
overdue, considering the massive American big block went out of production
30 years ago.
Irwindale, California, July 1973
It's the apex of hot rod culture, and 13,000 high-on-a-summer-night SoCal
race fans are partying in the bleachers and cheering for the Chi-Town
Hustler. This is the car that defined the era which still defines the sport
of drag racing: a '73 Dodge Charger pushed and altered into a creation whose
aesthetics and purpose could only have been a collaboration between Timothy
Leary and Edward Teller.
In his aluminized getup, the driver looks like Neil Armstrong, but his fire
suit isn't to shield him during reentry; it's for protection from the
explosive, supercharged, nitromethane-burning V-8 gurgling at his feet.
The Charger creeps forward to nudge the starting line and then stops,
squatting on its fat, underinflated rear tires. Idling, this mutant spawn of
a napalm bomb howls and cackles like a jackal possessed by Ol' Scratch
hisself. Punctuating the roar is an arpeggiating flicker of fire, a chemical
reaction from unburnt nitro spitting out of the exhaust and colliding with
the air. A young mechanic and future drag racing legend named Austin Coil
pours a sticky liquid onto the treads of the massive slicks and gives the
thumbs-up.
On cue, the driver hits the throttle thrice WWWHHAMMPPP... WWHHAMMMPPPP...
WWWHHHHAAAAAAAAHHHHH and drops the clutch. The fiercest, most acrid and
ground-shaking display of man and machinery this side of a moon shot is in
full effect. When a nitromethane-burning giga-horsepower funny car blasts
off, eyes water, nipples stiffen, and noses run. The fat, stumpy tires
contort and go skinny from the sudden jolt of centrifugal force, and the
screaming begins: the wheels, the engine, the chicks in the bleachers.
The plastic fantastic lays down a black patch a quarter-mile long. "He's
really fryin' the baloneys," one fan mutters as a toxic cloud of fuel and
rubber creeps in and gases the assembled stoners and yahoos like a kinder,
gentler Agent Orange.
The Chi-Town Hustler's spectacular run on this Watergate summer night is a
swan song of sorts, as the winds are blowing more than just spent fossil
fuel. The oil crisis is imminent. Out in the parking lot, engines and body
styles shrink, and mighty dinosaurs like the muscle car go extinct.
Passenger cars get smaller - and smarter.
1973 is the year drag racing stopped evolving, technologically if not
aesthetically. The sport staggers on, zombie-like, but henceforth on a
Galápagos of automotive innovation, the island that OPEC forgot.
Pomona, California, November 1998
The NHRA wakes up from its Rip Van Winkle sleep, sees the kids tearing
around in their hopped-up econoboxes, and realizes that unless something is
done, the sport will lose any hope of a future. So it stages an import-car
drag exhibition for the tens of thousands of dyed-in-the-wool race fans here
to see John "Brute" Force either win Funny Car or catch fire at 300 mph (or
both).
The idea seems innocuous enough: Expose the old school to what the new
school is doing with modern street machines. Let them see the econoboxes
with the big slicks on the front wheels and intake manifolds plumbed for
clouds of nitrous. Make them watch as the imports chirp and then zigzag down
the strip.
The leading lights of the new school are Ed "Real Genius" Bergenholtz, a
brainy Filipino-American car geek with a German name, and Lisa Kubo, an
MTV-ready buzz clip of a driver from Rosemead, California. Both are grinding
gears in heavily modified Hondas.
Bergenholtz earned his nickname when he and his brother, Ron, reinvented the
wheelie bar and then broke the 10-second benchmark in the quarter-mile.
Wheelie bars are like car training wheels. They trail behind a dragster,
preventing it from tipping over backwards on launch. The Bergenholtz
brothers put wheelie bars on their '89 Honda CRX - a front-wheel-drive car,
which, by definition, cannot wheelie. On a front-wheel-drive car, the (now
slightly misnomered) wheelie bars shift the center of gravity forward. They
prevent the rear shocks from compressing at launch. This is, in fact, genius
in its simplicity: Gain traction by planting the front end more firmly on
the tarmac.
So here they are. The PA system squawks with a hype-laden buildup that boils
down to three points: 1) Danger lurks on the street, 2) the NHRA should be
commended for rehabbing these former scofflaws, and 3) this is the future,
baby. Finally, the timing tower goes green and Bergenholtz steps on it,
breaking the front axle with the power of the motor. The machine flops onto
the starting line, impotent and immobile. The crowd reels, and a flurry of
jetsam from the snack bar litters the track. Chants of "No More Rice" and
"Buy a Chevy" metastasize, and as the next pair of rice racers flip their
ignition switches and begin laying rubber, the jeers overwhelm the screech
of the hyper-revved VTEC engines.
The young turks take the race-baiting in stride, with a calculated, almost
cryogenic confidence. They grok down to their fire boots that this is all
part of an evolution. "You can't force somebody to like something with the
slicks on the front," Kubo explains later. "They have their way, we have our
way."
The NHRA learns this lesson, too: separate events for separate cultures.
Drunken flag-wavers in sweat-stained undershirts heckling the new race car
drivers is not the kind of identity crisis that the NHRA wants televised.
Funny car fans are spared the Asian invasion, and the street racers get a
league of their own: the Sport Compact Series.
Pomona, California, October 2002
The starting line of this season's NHRA Sport Compact World Finals is a
groovy tableau of nitrous-addled Asian, Latino, and Caucasian kids geeking
out on import power. Team Bergenholtz is here, tweaking the wheelie bars on
its CRX. Lisa Kubo is here too, on crutches. She crashed going 166 mph in a
qualifying heat two weeks before. Getting in position for a view of the
action, I cruise along the safety wall that separates the bleachers from the
tarmac and end up between two railbirds, old-timers who come to the track
for every NHRA shindig, regardless.
"My dogs hate it," says the first, a wiry and hirsute hippie.
"What?" I can't hear him over the whine and grind of the high-pitched
Japanese power plants pulling their drivers down the track.
"They hate it." He points to the parking lot. "The sound. They're in my van
howling."
"Do you take them to all the races?"
"Yeah. They actually like the sound of funny cars, but they can't stand the
rice burners."
Two Mazdas rev up to the red line on their tachometers and jump through the
gate, spluttering and dancing a stiff, disjointed hully-gully down the drag
strip.
"It sounds like they're strangling ducks," I tell him.
"They're on the chip, trying to get turbo boost." There's no mistaking the
derision in his voice.
Under the hood, sensors monitoring the rpms are wired to an
engine-management computer that regulates the timing of the spark, the
volume of fuel going to the combustion chambers, and the boost from the
turbocharger. Import racers jack into this computer and reprogram it to pump
up performance. It's more of an art than a science, so when the driver swaps
pedals at the green light, as often as not the tires shake, the car
stutters, two cylinders end up firing at once, and POP, all hell breaks
loose in a puff of blue smoke.
"It's gonna take a while for me to get used to the sound of a chip," I say
to my nodding companion. "It grates."
But the graybeard standing on the other side of me just shakes his head.
"I love this stuff," he laughs. "The semi-reliability of their technology
and their lack of driving skills keep it interesting. Kinda like the good
ol' days - you never know what's gonna happen."
Pomona, California, November 2002
I return to Pomona the following weekend to see the monolithic mastodons of
old-school drag racing pound the ground. The Funny Car champ should be, like
it has been for the past 10 straight years, the Ford-sponsored team: driver
John Force and Austin Coil, the winningest crew chief in the NHRA. The
number two qualifier this weekend is Dean Skuza, piloting a replica Dodge.
It's raining. Besotted bleacher bums drink beer and hang on a chain-link
fence, oblivious. It's a mood of denial and frustration. Everybody is
pretending they're not all wet.
During the downpour, I grab shelter in something called the Castrol GTX
Technology Center, a sort of earthbound Enterprise for John Force Racing
replete with gratuitous banks of monitors, blinking lights, and a trash bin
filled with sundry pieces of hardware: blower rotors, cams, pistons.
Coil, the brains of the operation, indulges me while I ask his opinion of
the new generation of hot-rodders, the kids coming up off the Pacoima
streets.
"You mean like that movie The Fast and the Frivolous? The fact that somebody
was programming his computer during the run," Coil snickers. "It amazes me
there was that much time, y'know?"
But the wisecrack is just a cover for his underlying frustration with the
NHRA. "I'm hoping for a change in the rules to bring the sport into the 20th
century, if not the 21st," he concedes, working a toothpick between his
gums. "We're not allowed to be as sophisticated as what we drive to the
racetrack."
The next day the weather improves - but not for rival racer Skuza. He loses
not only his heat, but also his big-money Mopar sponsorship. He's feeling
philosophical. I ask him what he thinks about the new drivers in their rice
rockets.
"I'm watching these import cars using 10.5-inch tires run like a bat out of
hell, and I'm like, 'Holy fug.' That is scary," he says, waving a cigarette.
"Those cars are just not designed to do that. That's why we've seen some
hellacious crashes, and injuries and deaths. But I think that one of the
reasons my deal with Mopar went away is because, corporate-wise, they are
looking at it as the future."
When I suggest the funny car class might want to adopt some of the
technologies used by the sport compacts, Skuza stands up for the pneumatic
computer. "Air timers can do what electronics can do." Plus, he adds, in an
era of declining sponsorship, the teams just can't afford to upgrade to
electronic control systems.
Coil, who's clearly bursting to give a rice-burner upgrade to funny cars,
skewers that argument with a simple cost assessment: "With today's
technology, $10,000 in computer controls could save $100,000 in broken
parts."
But to Skuza, that's not the bottom line. "What I don't want," he says, "is
the best programmer winning the race."
Commerce, California, November 2002
The next night, import racer Ed Bergenholtz and I are chowing down at a
Denny's in an industrial section of East LA. As we talk, fog slinks inland,
slowly blanketing the rail yard outside.
Across town, John Force, Austin Coil, Dean Skuza, and the Superstars of
Professional Drag Racing are at the NHRA awards ceremony at Hollywood's
Kodak Theatre - home of the Academy Awards - accepting trophies and giving
televised speeches.
Over meat and potatoes, I hear about Bergenholtz's day job: "Project plans,
cost analysis, building infrastructures." He's an IT guy. "Computers pay for
my drag racing," he says.
With a nod toward the street racers cruising for outlaw action just outside
the restaurant, Bergenholtz says he no longer wants "to support that
environment." He tells me about his homeboy, Rob Sapinoso, who hung out at
the Bergenholtz brothers' garage in Orange County. "Sap" was a UC Irvine
honor student gunned down on the outskirts of Little Saigon by a Vietnamese
gang.
"But his CRX lives on," Bergenholtz says into a plateful of mashed spuds.
The rubout inspired the brothers' move to legal racing. They campaigned
Sap's car and won by remapping its engine management computer to wring out
that last tiny margin of horsepower.
"The appeal is in pushing these motors to the edge of breaking," says
Bergenholtz, summing up drag racing's central ethos. So what's the new
twist, Ed? "Anything you can do with a wrench, I can do with the up key, the
down key, and the Enter key."
Stuart Rice
conical/cylindrical ratio. Unfortunately, it is undermined rather
seriously by the fact that the source uses the terms "trumpet" and
"bugle" interchangeably:
"This basic horn came into being as the standard U.S. Army Cavalry
trumpet in G, specification No. 325 dated May 2, 1892 (Quartermaster
General's Office, War Department) which supplanted the previous model
1879 F trumpet with C crook. These were characterized by detailed
specifications with drawings and dimensions. The bugle described in
the specifications was to be the basis for almost every bugle
manufactured in the U.S. up to the present."
Jeff <JMITC...@hvc.rr.com> wrote in message news:<3E4C3CB3...@hvc.rr.com>...
> Stuart Rice wrote:
>
> >Jeff <JMITC...@hvc.rr.com> wrote in message news:<3E497AA3...@hvc.rr.com>...
> >>So to make it brief, you have no research to support your contentions
> >>and resort to personal attacks in lieu of knowledge of the subject material.
> >I apologize if you felt my "attacks" were "personal." However, you're
> >right - I've presented no more "research" on bugle specifications here
> >than you have. As someone who doesn't profess to be a student of this
> >subject, I'm OK with that.
> If you wish to have more detailed information about the specifications
> of what constitutes a bugle versus a field trumpet, here are the links;
>
> http://www.tapsbugler.com/HistoryoftheBugle/HistoryoftheBugle1.html
>
> And for specifics of the M1892 Field Trumpet;
>
> http://www.tapsbugler.com/HistoryoftheBugle/OriginsoftheM1892page1.html
>
> However be forewarned that you will once again be confronted with the
> reality that "a bugle has a conical shape through-out" and that means
> your contention that "a bugle has a certain ratio of conical to
> cylindrical bore tubing" is inaccurate and false, given that a bugle has
> no cylindrical bore tubing.
So bugles are entirely conical. Is that your final answer?
I assume you realize we're dealing with drum corps' definition of
bugle (as it behooves us to define our historical position first).
Are you saying the bugles DCI played 1972-1999 had *no* cylindrical
tubing?
> Also the reality that the M1892 US
> Regulation Bugle, the model for all valveless and single piston valve
> bugles in drum corps, is a field trumpet will be presented with bugle
> specifications by noted bugle historian, Jack Carter. He is credited in
> the new Drum Corps History book and is one of the foremost authorities
> on US military bugles and field trumpets on the planet.
Which is great, but the sources (links) you posted called the M1892 a
"bugle." If an appeal to the government is going to confound the
matter, then lets instead settle the matter of what we have been
playing and then go comparing. I've heard enough about changing specs
to know that
> For anyone else reading, this is a great new bugle website and I'll be
> updating mine later this winter.
Thanks for the links.
Stuart E. Rice
www.marchingresearch.com
Jeff
The basic difference between bugles and trumpets is found in the shape of the bell. The musical definition of a trumpet (natural trumpet) is that of a horn which has two thirds of its length in the form of a cylindrical tube - usually it is five sixths of the total length. A bugle has a conical shape through-out. We can therefore make the general assumption that a trumpet is cylindrically shaped with a cup-shaped mouthpiece, while a bugle is conical in nature with a funnel-shaped mouthpiece. The shape of the bell plus the shape of the mouthpiece produces a different quality of sound in each. The trumpet is known for its bright, strident, brash sound, while the bugle is known for its darker and mellower tone. Today, the term "bugle" can simply mean a brass instrument without valves or slides.Given that the M1892 Calvary trumpet in G, otherwise know as the US Regulation Bugle, has a cylindrical slide that will tune it to F and lacks the conical bugle shape throughout, I do not feel that undermines the classification. The trumpet has a quick flaring bell and one can note the similar nature of a trumpet bell and that of a soprano bugle. Also the use of trumpet mouthpieces in both instruments also confirms the nature of the instrument. A bugle bell will look cone shaped, expanding gradually until the bell rim.
Stuart, did you congratulate me? It must have been a typo or the sub-zero weather here has affected my brain. :-)
Jeff, cold in the Catskills
Jeff Ream
My soon to be fiancee's dad just found an old one valve bugle and
bought it for her...it's in G, she checked it with her G mello she has at home.
but we cant find a serial number, and the only thing we can tell about who may
have made it is engraving by the bell that says "Abbott professional".
any clues?
Mike Poche
>may
>have made it is engraving by the bell that says "Abbott professional".
>any clues?
"WHO" plays bugle at the baseball game ?
The OTHER Mike
Blood type : Bb NEGATIVE
2002 Best New Smartass of the Year
Stuart Rice
> There is truly much confusion regarding application of the word "bugle"
> to any valveless instrument. That is clearly pointed out on the website.
> Here is the definition;
>
> > The basic difference between bugles and trumpets is found in the shape
> > of the bell. The musical definition of a trumpet (natural trumpet) is
> > that of a horn which has two thirds of its length in the form of a
> > cylindrical tube - usually it is five sixths of the total length. A
> > bugle has a conical shape through-out. We can therefore make the
> > general assumption that a trumpet is cylindrically shaped with a
> > cup-shaped mouthpiece, while a bugle is conical in nature with a
> > funnel-shaped mouthpiece. The shape of the bell plus the shape of the
> > mouthpiece produces a different quality of sound in each. The trumpet
> > is known for its bright, strident, brash sound, while the bugle is
> > known for its darker and mellower tone. Today, the term "bugle" can
> > simply mean a brass instrument without valves or slides.
Yeah, I read that too. And then I read this:
> >"This basic horn came into being as the standard U.S. Army Cavalry
> >trumpet in G, specification No. 325 dated May 2, 1892 (Quartermaster
> >General's Office, War Department) which supplanted the previous model
> >1879 F trumpet with C crook. These were characterized by detailed
> >specifications with drawings and dimensions. The bugle described in
> >the specifications was to be the basis for almost every bugle
> >manufactured in the U.S. up to the present."
A website (or anyone) can't use terms interchangeably and deserve
respect for their definitions of the same. Sorry, but these guys
really shot themselves in the foot.
> Given that the M1892 Calvary trumpet in G, otherwise know as the US
> Regulation Bugle, has a cylindrical slide that will tune it to F and
> lacks the conical bugle shape throughout, I do not feel that undermines
> the classification.
I thought we were talking about definitions. I really don't care who
made the horn. What I do care about is who is defining it, and
whether or not they can tell the difference between a bugle and a
trumpet.
> The trumpet has a quick flaring bell and one can
> note the similar nature of a trumpet bell and that of a soprano bugle.
Sure. Not that there aren't crossbreeds to be found. I worry less
about the existence of crossbreeds than I do about legislation and
doctrine which contributes to them, and the motivation behind that
legislation.
> Also the use of trumpet mouthpieces in both instruments also confirms
> the nature of the instrument.
So tell me about the difference between a trumpet mouthpiece and a
bugle mouthpiece.
> A bugle bell will look cone shaped,
> expanding gradually until the bell rim.
Yeah, yeah - we all know what they look like.
> Stuart, did you congratulate me?
Yeah, I wasn't sure we'd ever get you on-topic. :)
Stuart E. Rice
www.marchingresearch.com
> --