The Proposals Before the Rules Congress
FrankAreMe
DCI Rules Congress, with my comments. These are taken directly from the
February 1999 issue of Drum Corps World.
Proposal ID#A: Would require the judges at DCI Regionals and DCI Championships
to listen 90% of the time and talk only 10% of the time on their tapes.
Submitted by James Messina.
Should this pass--Yes. I never knew this was a problem but I can see why it
may be. I've been in the press box numerous times covering shows and have been
amazed that a judge can talk about the first note or move of a show for 45
seconds and then begin to talkl about the second note of the show almost a
minute after it happened. In other words, can they really pay attention to
what is going on at the moment while talking about something that happened 20
to 30 seconds earlier? I don't think most humans can do that.
Will it pass? Probably, especially since there is really no need, in my
opinion, for extensive comments at the championships. That's it, there is no
more after that so why comment more on it? The only problem I see is
enforcement. What happens if the judge talks 20% of the time? Does this mean
his score is no longer valid?
Proposal ID#B: Would require the judging panel at DCI finals to see each corps
at least once at the regionals. Submitted by Raymond Luniewski, director of
Lake Erie Regiment
Should this pass--Yes...in this day where score is based, in my opinion, on
improvement over previous shows and design rather on what is actually being
performed at the moment, then the judges need to see the corps at least once.
I would actually like to see a rule where finals are judged by a panel that
hasn't seen a show all year and has no knowledge of what is going on during the
season and have the corps draw for appearence position so there would be really
be subjectivity at finals.
Will it pass? Yes, there shouldn't be a problem with this one. Most judges
are at the regionals anyway, unless of course the term "seeing a corps" means
judging them and not just watching from the stands.
Proposal 1: Would add crowd participation to the judging of weekend shows.
The audience would have 10 to 30% of the total scoring. Submitted by Jeff
Fiedler, director of the Cavaliers
Should this pass--YES! It's about time for this. The fans have been largely
ignored in the show design for most of the 1990's which has led to decreased
attendance at many shows. To give them this type of input would have a very
great beneficial impact on future design.
Will it pass? No, because, and I was told this by a person who has instructed
many top corps, that it doesn't matter if shows are designed for the fans or
not or if the seats are full or not, because the corps will still get their
money. Yes that is a disgusting viewpoint. I hope I'm wrong but I don't see
this passing, not this time anyway as long as certain designers are still
considered gods.
Proposal 2: Would allow brass, front-bell valve instruments in any key.
Submitted by David Gibbs, director of the Blue Devils.
Should this pass--No. In all my years of being in drum corps and also having
seen marching bands, it's so obvious that the sound of a hornline is so much
more powerful when all instruments are in the same key. Yes, three valve horns
in G may or not be bugles but they are the best for what we do and will
continue to be.
Will this pass: No, there are still enough traditionalists involved to thwart
this thankfully.
Proposal 3: To allow the use of amplification. Submitted by George Hopkins.
Should this pass---Emphatic no! George thinks pits can't be heard. Or solos.
They can quite well. Pits have been known to overplay the brass at
times---will that be solved if their amplified? Only with a good soundman.
What about when it rains and the amps have to be shut off and covered? The
soloist will actually have to play like he has a set, just like they always
have.
Will this pass: No, but it will be close.
Proposal 4: Would allow for electronic instruments. Submitted by George
Hopkins.
Should this pass---Very emphatic not just no but hell no! This proposal, plus
#3 and #2 would narrow the difference between drum corps and band. If all
three of these were to pass all that drum corps would be is BOA and USSBA
without woodwinds, and those won't be far behind. There has always been a
distinction of what drum corps is. Electronics isn't.
Will this pass--No. There are too many who still love drum corps for what it
is and what the traditions are.
Proposal 5: Would allow unlimited membership in open class corps. Submitted
by George Hopkins.
Should this pass--No. How many corps really have 128 members right now? Maybe
eight at most. Right now a corps can have 2000 members if it wants, but can
only put 128 on the field. There has to be a limit--if a corps can march 250
or 300 and not fall on their face finacially because of all the extra money for
more buses, food, etc, then sure why not. But to make it unlimited, no,
because there is always someone who will take it to extremes just because they
can just as corps have done with touring nationally.
Will it pass--no, not without limits.
In conclusion--if proposals 2, 3. and 4 pass it is no longer drum corps. It
would be some sort of inbred inbetween marching band and what was drum corps.
Thankfully there will still be drum corps in the DCA and alumni corps.
Laufkid
Thanks for the info!
Please keep us posted on the outcomes
Rick>These are the proposals that will be voted on next weekend (Jan 29-31) at
david fisher
FrankAreMe wrote:
>
> Proposal ID#A: Would require the judges at DCI Regionals and DCI Championships
> to listen 90% of the time and talk only 10% of the time on their tapes.
> Submitted by James Messina.
>
> Should this pass--Yes. I never knew this was a problem but I can see why it
> may be. I've been in the press box numerous times covering shows and have been
> amazed that a judge can talk about the first note or move of a show for 45
> seconds and then begin to talkl about the second note of the show almost a
> minute after it happened. In other words, can they really pay attention to
> what is going on at the moment while talking about something that happened 20
> to 30 seconds earlier? I don't think most humans can do that.
>
> Will it pass? Probably, especially since there is really no need, in my
> opinion, for extensive comments at the championships. That's it, there is no
> more after that so why comment more on it? The only problem I see is
> enforcement. What happens if the judge talks 20% of the time? Does this mean
> his score is no longer valid?]
I agree that this proposal should past and should apply to all contest. There is no
need for them to talk all the time during the show. You can hear them talking in
the stands during soft spots and it take away from the corp performance.
>
>
> Proposal ID#B: Would require the judging panel at DCI finals to see each corps
> at least once at the regionals. Submitted by Raymond Luniewski, director of
> Lake Erie Regiment
>
> Should this pass--Yes...in this day where score is based, in my opinion, on
> improvement over previous shows and design rather on what is actually being
> performed at the moment, then the judges need to see the corps at least once.
> I would actually like to see a rule where finals are judged by a panel that
> hasn't seen a show all year and has no knowledge of what is going on during the
> season and have the corps draw for appearence position so there would be really
> be subjectivity at finals.
>
> Will it pass? Yes, there shouldn't be a problem with this one. Most judges
> are at the regionals anyway, unless of course the term "seeing a corps" means
> judging them and not just watching from the stands.
I agree with this.
>
>
> Proposal 1: Would add crowd participation to the judging of weekend shows.
> The audience would have 10 to 30% of the total scoring. Submitted by Jeff
> Fiedler, director of the Cavaliers
>
> Should this pass--YES! It's about time for this. The fans have been largely
> ignored in the show design for most of the 1990's which has led to decreased
> attendance at many shows. To give them this type of input would have a very
> great beneficial impact on future design.
>
> Will it pass? No, because, and I was told this by a person who has instructed
> many top corps, that it doesn't matter if shows are designed for the fans or
> not or if the seats are full or not, because the corps will still get their
> money. Yes that is a disgusting viewpoint. I hope I'm wrong but I don't see
> this passing, not this time anyway as long as certain designers are still
> considered gods.
Should be only 5% only.
>
>
> Proposal 2: Would allow brass, front-bell valve instruments in any key.
> Submitted by David Gibbs, director of the Blue Devils.
>
> Should this pass--No. In all my years of being in drum corps and also having
> seen marching bands, it's so obvious that the sound of a hornline is so much
> more powerful when all instruments are in the same key. Yes, three valve horns
> in G may or not be bugles but they are the best for what we do and will
> continue to be.
>
> Will this pass: No, there are still enough traditionalists involved to thwart
> this thankfully.
>
This should not be past as it will take bulge sound away and become a band sound.
It is also easy to tune all the horns if they are in the same key.
>
> Proposal 3: To allow the use of amplification. Submitted by George Hopkins.
>
> Should this pass---Emphatic no! George thinks pits can't be heard. Or solos.
> They can quite well. Pits have been known to overplay the brass at
> times---will that be solved if their amplified? Only with a good soundman.
> What about when it rains and the amps have to be shut off and covered? The
> soloist will actually have to play like he has a set, just like they always
> have.
>
> Will this pass: No, but it will be close.
NO WAY SHOULD THIS PASS. IF IT DOES, THEN THE BANDOS HAVE WON.
>
>
> Proposal 4: Would allow for electronic instruments. Submitted by George
> Hopkins.
>
> Should this pass---Very emphatic not just no but hell no! This proposal, plus
> #3 and #2 would narrow the difference between drum corps and band. If all
> three of these were to pass all that drum corps would be is BOA and USSBA
> without woodwinds, and those won't be far behind. There has always been a
> distinction of what drum corps is. Electronics isn't.
>
> Will this pass--No. There are too many who still love drum corps for what it
> is and what the traditions are.
NO WAY SHOULD THIS PASS. IF IT DOES, THEN THE BANDOS HAVE WON.
>
>
> Proposal 5: Would allow unlimited membership in open class corps. Submitted
> by George Hopkins.
>
> Should this pass--No. How many corps really have 128 members right now? Maybe
> eight at most. Right now a corps can have 2000 members if it wants, but can
> only put 128 on the field. There has to be a limit--if a corps can march 250
> or 300 and not fall on their face finacially because of all the extra money for
> more buses, food, etc, then sure why not. But to make it unlimited, no,
> because there is always someone who will take it to extremes just because they
> can just as corps have done with touring nationally.
>
> Will it pass--no, not without limits.
NO THIS SHOULD NOT PAST. The membership should be reduces. If the membership is
increase, then there will be less DC around in the next few years. You only have to
look at the decrease in the number of DC around these days since the increase in
size of DIV 1 corps. The limits for DIV 1/11 should be sit lower to make all corps
equal. It will also cut the cost to put a corp on the field and to tour.
>
>
> In conclusion--if proposals 2, 3. and 4 pass it is no longer drum corps. It
> would be some sort of inbred inbetween marching band and what was drum corps.
I total agree with this and the end of drum corp will begin.
>
> Thankfully there will still be drum corps in the DCA and alumni corps.
--
Casper the Ghost
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
David Fisher Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
Web Site http://www.globalserve.net/~dfisher
E-mail dfi...@globalserve.net
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
DDay
>>Proposal 2: Would allow brass, front-bell valve instruments in any key.
>
>>Proposal 3: To allow the use of amplification. Submitted by George Hopkins.
>>
Both these proposals,
<opinion mode-on>
(I can support #2 as long as there are NO TROMBONES, and Im a trombone
player, I just dont like the look of a company front with slides
sticking out. And tryng to run drills while moving to 6th postition
violates the laws of physics. I cant support #3 at all [never been a
big pit fan] even though arguments made in this post are valid.)
<opinion-mode-off>
would require major capital outlays by corps that are ready pushed to
the edge of their financial envelope. Sponsorships will help the top
corps, since they have the clout and PR but newer, less highly placed
corps wont have that option.
My question is will corps without electronics or any-key horns be
penalized by the judges SIMPLELY because they cant afford them or
have other priorities for their limited incomes? Will a "richer" corps
with electronics be placed ahead of a "less rich" corps without
electronics even though the "less rich" corps is better in build-up
and execution?
some questions that come to mind.
(anti-flame disclaimer: I agree that placement isnt EVERYTHING, you do
your best and it comes down to the opinions of 8 ??? people in green
shirts as I was taught, but this is a competative art form and so
placement is a facet.)
DDay
the previous post is a personal opinion and does not represent the
opinion of any organization I may or may not be afilliated with. And
of course, spelling does not count.
Zack Warren
crowd voting rule change. Made me second guess my initial negative
response....
~Zack
DTaylor91
<snip>
>Proposal 2: Would allow brass, front-bell valve instruments in any key.
>
>Submitted by David Gibbs, director of the Blue Devils.
>
>Should this pass--No. In all my years of being in drum corps and also having
>seen marching bands, it's so obvious that the sound of a hornline is so
>much
>more powerful when all instruments are in the same key. Yes, three valve
>horns
>in G may or not be bugles but they are the best for what we do and will
>continue to be.
>
>Will this pass: No, there are still enough traditionalists involved to
>thwart
>this thankfully.
>
I really can't see the big deal behind this. It has been my experience that it
doesn't matter what key, or brand, or how many valves the horn has when it
comes to playing in tune, or blending the sounds together, or even playing
"loud". The difference is in how well the performers are trained. The quality
of the instrument can either help or hinder the process of putting together a
fine brass section.
My reason for wanting it to pass is to have access to better quality
instruments. At this point in time, the only instrument that has a real
advantage for our activity is the trumpet, as most Bb marching brass does not
play any better (and sometimes worse) than bugles. Consider this, however, I'll
bet that if instrument manufacturers would be able to develop instruments for
drumcorps that they could also sell to marching bands, they would all compete
to produce a great product, and use drumcorps staff people for input on how to
improve those products, and to get the top hornlines to endorse their product
(maybe even sponsorships, imagine that), perhaps we would see a DRASTIC
improvement in what is available not only for drumcorps, but bands as well. I
can't put my finger on where I've seen something like this concept work before,
but maybe I'll remember soon :^)
Now as for trumpets, a well made soprano doesn't even come close to the quality
of even a medium grade trumpet. Why? marketability. A company that makes what I
consider to be the best soprano also makes custom built trumpets. Why do their
sopranos cost $450, and their trumpets cost $1500? Think about it a minute.
Yes, they could easily make a soprano of the same quality, but how many people
would be willing to pay $1500 for a soprano bugle, when you can buy a Bach
Stradivarius trumpet for $900? As an aside, one group that I know of did have
custom built 3 valve G bugles made for them, that are of superior quality, and
play as well as a custom built trumpet, but those were $2000. (The corps, BTW,
was FutureCorps)
>Proposal 3: To allow the use of amplification. Submitted by George Hopkins.
>
>Should this pass---Emphatic no! George thinks pits can't be heard. Or
>solos.
>They can quite well. Pits have been known to overplay the brass at
>times---will that be solved if their amplified? Only with a good soundman.
>
>What about when it rains and the amps have to be shut off and covered?
>The
>soloist will actually have to play like he has a set, just like they always
>have.
>
>Will this pass: No, but it will be close.
I hope this one passes as well. The issue here is not audibility, but the
quality of what you hear. I'm sure a lot of drumcorps audiences are not aware
of the wonderful colors of sound, and expressive qualities of a marimba or
vibraphone, simply because you have to beat the starch out of it for it to be
heard outdoors more than 10 yards away. These are great sounds that aren't
available because of how hard they have to be played, and the types of mallets
used on them to get them to project. The bigger issue is that the playing
techniques used to get the amount of sound out of these instruments are nothing
short of child abuse. Amplification would allow instructors to teach their
students proper playing techniques, and allow audiences to hear these wonderful
instruments as they were meant to be heard. Rain is not an issue. It can all be
made waterproof (or covered), and powered by batteries.
IMO, even if these pass, it will still be drumcorps. The activity is more about
the experience, and the life lessons learned, and the intense quest for
perfection than it is about what kind of horn you play.
Don Taylor
LEG at cba
In article <19990124173857...@ng-fi1.aol.com>, frank...@aol.com
(FrankAreMe) writes:
>In conclusion--if proposals 2, 3. and 4 pass it is no longer drum corps. It
>would be some sort of inbred inbetween marching band and what was drum corps.
>
>Thankfully there will still be drum corps in the DCA and alumni corps.
>
Frank,
I agree with you on all points. But consider this: IF DCI allows any key
brass, it will not be long before many corps in DCI will tell the kids to bring
their own horn. That will mean less business for the two companies left in the
bugle business and it might not be economically viable to continue
manufacturing. So IF that one passes, I'm going to go to the bank and get the
$$ to buy up all the bugles I can. DCA and Alumni corps will need them
someday....
Larry Girard, Jr.
MScout008
>The audience would have 10 to 30% of the total scoring. Submitted by Jeff
>Fiedler, director of the Cavaliers
This one won't pass because then the Scouts might actually win! Heaven forbid
such a thing! hehe. Thank god I'm not in Scouts to win, but rather the
experience of playing with such an awesome group. I think it will be cooler to
get 15 minutes of gratification from the fans rather than a couple seconds of
gratification from the judges. Sorry about that...just wanted to get that off
my chest.
Stephen Bond 008
May You Never Walk Alone
Madison Scouts Euphonium 99
-----------------------------------------------------
Carolina Crown 97
Bayou City Blues 98
DTaylor91
>My question is will corps without electronics or any-key horns be
>penalized by the judges SIMPLELY because they cant afford them or
>have other priorities for their limited incomes? Will a "richer" corps
>with electronics be placed ahead of a "less rich" corps without
>electronics even though the "less rich" corps is better in build-up
>and execution?
>
>some questions that come to mind.
These are valid concerns, however the situation is currently what you describe.
The corps that have more monetary resources already have access to much nicer
equipment, uniforms, tranportation, staff, even food than a corps of lesser
means would have. In other words, if the judging community isn't penalizing the
"have nots" now, then the situation would not change.
Don Taylor
Jeff Wise
>
> >Proposal 3: To allow the use of amplification. Submitted by George Hopkins.
> >
> quality of what you hear.
It looks like I'm going to need to trot out my patented example
about why I'm against electronics and amplification in DCI for
something like the 8th time (but it took all the way until January
for this cycle to retread, interesting).
Many years ago, way back in the mid-80's when I was heavily into
the burgeoning electronic synthesis field, I read an article from
"Keyboard" magazine that went something like this (all paraphrased
of course):
An exposition of some sort was being held out of doors in San
Diego. A string quartet piece was premiered by some avant garde
composer by some string quartet. The next day, a number of music
critics lavished favorably reviews on this piece.
The next day it was revealed that the piece was "Milli Vanilli'd"
by the string quartet, that in fact, the speakers used to amplify
them was actually broadcasting a sequence from a set of
synthesizers and so everyone, music critics included of course,
had been duped by this new and wonderful technology.
That was the mid-80's when digital synthesis and sampling were
still considered to be infant technologies. 15 years later we have
technology at our disposal that could wipe out professional
players.
And the proof is in those critics who COULD NOT TELL THE
DIFFERENCE! If music critics couldn't pass the "Memorex" test,
then how can we believe anyone else could potentially?
Further, does this proposal only allow for the pit to be miked?
Why? Why not soloists? If we then include soloists, why not trios
and quartets, or how about entire sections? Or better yet, why not
set up mics on the back sideline so when some section is playing
backfield they can be heard more clearly by the fans?
> I'm sure a lot of drumcorps audiences are not aware
> of the wonderful colors of sound, and expressive qualities of a marimba or
> vibraphone, simply because you have to beat the starch out of it for it to be
> heard outdoors more than 10 yards away. These are great sounds that aren't
> available because of how hard they have to be played, and the types of mallets
> used on them to get them to project.
This is a fair argument, but in my years of being associated with
drum corps, I've not had too many problems hearing the front
ensemble. True there are times when they get overmatched, but the
very nature of the drum and bugle corps activity does not solely
reflect the pit (no offense to those who play in the pit). I've
been in corps that have had great pits and judges who've said so,
but our drum scores did not show that. Why?
In my opinion, if DCI wants to amplify pits to help them be heard
and contribute more to the overall sound, then DCI needs to get
off its ass and create a 10 point category for the Color Guard and
take away those silly subjective points that are bunched up in the
GE caption.
> Rain is not an issue. It can all be
> made waterproof (or covered), and powered by batteries.
But the weather is an issue. Amps, mics and cables and heck any
electronic equipment can be delicate. Think of how much abuse a
pit puts onto its equipment each summer.
Further, think of how many practice fields and even stadiums
you've come across over the years that have no electric outlets
handy to plug into?
Generators? Sure, I guess gas prices are cheap right now, but what
happens when they ain't? And generators make noise. Wouldn't that
be a hoot to have a nice quiet marimba solo get drowned out on the
CD's because the corps' generator was louder!
And I for one would sure as heck not want to handle any type of
electrical equipment in any kind of rain storm or place with wet
grass or water around. And I certainly would not wish to be the
corps director that has to tell some mother their kid was
electrocuted, there's a lawsuit waiting to kill the activity (as
Bill Cook has said on many an occasion, drum corps is one
liability lawsuit away from being killed off).
> IMO, even if these pass, it will still be drumcorps. The activity is more about
> the experience, and the life lessons learned, and the intense quest for
> perfection than it is about what kind of horn you play.
This I can't disagree with much. I feel drum corps is different
from even when I marched (which was mid-80's into the early 90's).
Each passing generation evolves and changes the activity a little
bit. My niece just turned 3 and I doubt that when she's old enough
to march (say 11-12 years from now) that drum corps will not look
remotely what it was when I
was 15.
Jeff Wise
Jeff Wise
(surprising this is getting voted on during the Super Bowl
weekend, guess the Falcons really don't interest that many
people).
FrankAreMe wrote:
>
> Proposal ID#A: Would require the judges at DCI Regionals and DCI Championships
> to listen 90% of the time and talk only 10% of the time on their tapes.
> Submitted by James Messina.
I don't have a problem with the way things currently are. If a
judge wishes to comment at length about the first note, there must
be a reason. Many staffs, after a judge see their corps once or
twice, will try to lobby the judge to look at certain parts and
comment on certain things.
I don't think anyone can take in the whole show and comment about
everything. That's why a whole section could fall down on stage
right and the field judge miss it because they're on the extreme
stage left.
> Proposal ID#B: Would require the judging panel at DCI finals to see each corps
> at least once at the regionals. Submitted by Raymond Luniewski, director of
> Lake Erie Regiment
This should already be happening. There should not have to be a
rule on this, I would think DCI itself should be able to schedule
this better. Though what am I saying, DCI people be able to
schedule things well? Maybe next year.
> Proposal 1: Would add crowd participation to the judging of weekend shows.
> The audience would have 10 to 30% of the total scoring. Submitted by Jeff
> Fiedler, director of the Cavaliers
This is a cute idea with a pure marketing drive behind it. But
think about it, it extremely favors home shows and places where a
certain corps has a built-in base. I guess my question is how
exactly does the audience vote? Do they get little buttons and
choose a corps, pass ballots around? Clap and cheer?
But I certainly don't think designers will necessarily change
their methods just to win fan applause, unless it were more than
50% of the vote.
Heck, I'll write a show that's 7 minutes of pure boredom aimed
squarely at the judges, stop and play my closer as something out
of the Bridgemen, get the crowd to go wild as my corps leaves the
field and probably walk away with a lot of crowd votes (it's what
you leave a crowd with that they remember most - all marketing
types know that).
> Proposal 2: Would allow brass, front-bell valve instruments in any key.
> Submitted by David Gibbs, director of the Blue Devils.
If David Gibbs or Hopkins or someone else for that matter can show
me with proof and real numbers from real honest-to-goodness
studies that show changing to any key instruments will ease the
financial burdens on corps and lower costs for the corps (which of
course the corps will pass on those savings to members in the form
of lower dues, right? Right? as if), then I can maybe go for this
proposal.
> Proposal 3: To allow the use of amplification. Submitted by George Hopkins.
I rebutted Don Taylor's insightful support of this proposal in
another post. I'll cover again in a nutshell under the next
proposal.
> Proposal 4: Would allow for electronic instruments. Submitted by George
> Hopkins.
This is useless, unless DCI and/or Hopkins believe the future of
the activity lies in the amalgamation of DCI and BOA and
USSSSSSSBA (or whatever Hopkins' band association is called these
days).
For about $5000 I could put together a decent electronic set up
that could play Frank Zappa's "Jazz From Hell" (or other stuff)
crystal clear with beautifully in-tune runs and all that stuff.
For $10,000, I could do all that and you would have to really
scratch your head and wonder if the horn players were playing it
or the sequencers I set up.
So what's the point? I'll take the horns away from the marching
members and have them do Cirque du Soleil for 11 minutes on the
field and walk away with a championship (I'll still charge members
$1600 to march because of all the costs I have in storing those
ancient bugles, even though I fired the brass arranger and staff
and the percussion arranger and staff).
Unless of course the weather is threatening, in which case, I tell
the crowd sorry, we can't play tonight, but your tickets are
non-refundable and where's the check for the corps, pack it up and
travel to the next town.
I don't care about the arguments that adding electronics doesn't
make it drum corps, either you agree with that or you don't and
ain't no one gonna change your mind (as we've found out in similar
debates from the past 5+ years).
Adding electronics will eventually take over the activity and
replace acoustical instruments, period (it may take a decade or
two, but it will - most people call it progress which they
mistakenly think is synonymous with evolution).
My mom and pop will not suddenly decide to go see a drum corps
show because they're using electronics, neither will my co-workers
who call me bando when I mention my corps past. Electronics will
*NOT* bring new people out to shows. I'd repeat that sentence
again as a dramatic device, but I won't.
Lastly, on this issue, I don't understand how Hopkins can come up
with this proposal *and* the next one...
> Proposal 5: Would allow unlimited membership in open class corps. Submitted
> by George Hopkins.
Why would George want more people if he can eliminate them with
electronics? Oh yeah, I forgot, someone needs to pay his salary.
But I still don't follow this logic considering that less than 300
people showed up for the International Auditions for 5 YEA! corps.
I'll go out on a limb and bet that at least 3 other corps had that
many people show up for their first camp.
If anything, it would make more economic sense to go the other way
and propose that corps be limited to 90 members (2 buses over 3).
How many corps fielded 128? Think of the quality of members you
could go if you had just 90 people? Hey, think of the money that
could be saved by only operating 2 member buses and 1 staff bus.
Think of how much money that could be saved on having to feed 90
people over 110-120? Why that could maybe cut down member fees (as
if).
Then again, with unlimited membership, Hopkins and YEA! can
further corner the market on talent and ensure they always win.
Oops, I forgot, Hopkins doesn't care about winning, even though
SCV had that "lame-ass" show last year that George mentioned at
the I&E showcase which his corps was not allowed to participate in
because it emphasizes individuality and not the good of the whole.
Jeff Wise
Jeff Wise
(surprising this is getting voted on during the Super Bowl
weekend, guess the Falcons really don't interest that many
people).
FrankAreMe wrote:
>
> Proposal ID#A: Would require the judges at DCI Regionals and DCI Championships
> to listen 90% of the time and talk only 10% of the time on their tapes.
> Submitted by James Messina.
I don't have a problem with the way things currently are. If a
judge wishes to comment at length about the first note, there must
be a reason. Many staffs, after a judge see their corps once or
twice, will try to lobby the judge to look at certain parts and
comment on certain things.
I don't think anyone can take in the whole show and comment about
everything. That's why a whole section could fall down on stage
right and the field judge miss it because they're on the extreme
stage left.
> Proposal ID#B: Would require the judging panel at DCI finals to see each corps
> at least once at the regionals. Submitted by Raymond Luniewski, director of
> Lake Erie Regiment
This should already be happening. There should not have to be a
rule on this, I would think DCI itself should be able to schedule
this better. Though what am I saying, DCI people be able to
schedule things well? Maybe next year.
> Proposal 1: Would add crowd participation to the judging of weekend shows.
> The audience would have 10 to 30% of the total scoring. Submitted by Jeff
> Fiedler, director of the Cavaliers
This is a cute idea with a pure marketing drive behind it. But
think about it, it extremely favors home shows and places where a
certain corps has a built-in base. I guess my question is how
exactly does the audience vote? Do they get little buttons and
choose a corps, pass ballots around? Clap and cheer?
But I certainly don't think designers will necessarily change
their methods just to win fan applause, unless it were more than
50% of the vote.
Heck, I'll write a show that's 7 minutes of pure boredom aimed
squarely at the judges, stop and play my closer as something out
of the Bridgemen, get the crowd to go wild as my corps leaves the
field and probably walk away with a lot of crowd votes (it's what
you leave a crowd with that they remember most - all marketing
types know that).
> Proposal 2: Would allow brass, front-bell valve instruments in any key.
> Submitted by David Gibbs, director of the Blue Devils.
If David Gibbs or Hopkins or someone else for that matter can show
me with proof and real numbers from real honest-to-goodness
studies that show changing to any key instruments will ease the
financial burdens on corps and lower costs for the corps (which of
course the corps will pass on those savings to members in the form
of lower dues, right? Right? as if), then I can maybe go for this
proposal.
> Proposal 3: To allow the use of amplification. Submitted by George Hopkins.
I rebutted Don Taylor's insightful support of this proposal in
another post. I'll cover again in a nutshell under the next
proposal.
> Proposal 4: Would allow for electronic instruments. Submitted by George
> Hopkins.
This is useless, unless DCI and/or Hopkins believe the future of
> Proposal 5: Would allow unlimited membership in open class corps. Submitted
> by George Hopkins.
Why would George want more people if he can eliminate them with
DTaylor91
>It looks like I'm going to need to trot out my patented example
>about why I'm against electronics and amplification in DCI for
>something like the 8th time
<big snip>
I responded to Jeff privately via e-mail, before I realized he posted the
message here as well, so I'll share some of the points my response:
As I stated, the issue isn't audibility (volume), but the quality of the sound
you get from the audience's perspective. The kids are pounding on these things,
with mallets that are mostly too hard. You just don't get the lushness of sound
available from a lot of the keyboard instruments because of the way they have
to be played to project over the brass and battery.
Of course sequencing shouldn't be allowed. It should be a relatively simple
matter for the timing and penalties judge to check the equipment as it's being
set up, to make sure there are nothing other than mics plugged into the sound
board.
There are battery powered amps (not very loud, but functional- Peavey makes a
nice one) and power inverters available. Generators should NOT be allowed under
any circumstances. I've also seen the weather and wear-and-tear issues solved,
as well.
Don Taylor
leaD .M nevetS
is *next* weekend. :)
In article <36ABE45F...@bellsouth.net>,
Jeff Wise <wise...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>(surprising this is getting voted on during the Super Bowl
>weekend, guess the Falcons really don't interest that many
steve
"I like children, but I can never eat a whole one!"
Glen Johnson
And its being voted on NEXT weekend, like he said :)
In article <78grj4$mdf$1...@newshost.nmt.edu>, sa...@nmt.edu (leaD .M nevetS)
wrote:
>Obviously, you are not much of a football fan because the Super Bowl
>is *next* weekend. :)
>
>
>In article <36ABE45F...@bellsouth.net>,
>Jeff Wise <wise...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>(surprising this is getting voted on during the Super Bowl
>>weekend, guess the Falcons really don't interest that many
>
Jeff Mitchell
hallway. Once it is dry I'm going to bed.
The Instructor Judge College held in Chicago last weekend devoted much time to
these proposals and sent recommendations to the board. Before anyone gets crazy,
The brass caucus voted unanimously for 3 valve G bugles in 1975. The directors
unanimously said no.
FrankAreMe wrote:
> These are the proposals that will be voted on next weekend (Jan 29-31) at the
> DCI Rules Congress, with my comments. These are taken directly from the
> February 1999 issue of Drum Corps World.
>
The Rules Congress was last weekend Jan 16-18. Each corps present had one vote
Sunday on each proposal. The corps have two weeks time to vote as in the past staff
would vote for a proposal and find little time to meet with their director to
discuss the pros and cons. The voting will be limited to the top 21 on 1998.
> Proposal ID#A: Would require the judges at DCI Regionals and DCI Championships
> to listen 90% of the time and talk only 10% of the time on their tapes.
> Submitted by James Messina.
This was delegated out to the judging heads. Probably won't be employed, but there
is no rule on how much to talk at present. As a vet Finals judge, I don't say as
much simply to focus on the score. That is what matters, there is no tomorrow. Each
judge should find a way to be comfortable at big shows. Talking less is an option.
> Proposal ID#B: Would require the judging panel at DCI finals to see each corps
> at least once at the regionals. Submitted by Raymond Luniewski, director of
> Lake Erie Regiment
>
Same here to the judging team. This was for Division 2/3 as open Class corps do get
to see all judges via the Focus weekends. The problem is getting all judges to see
all possible finalists at the 2/3 level. It is logistically tough as there are more
corps, but we should see if we can do a better job.
>
>
> Proposal 1: Would add crowd participation to the judging of weekend shows.
> The audience would have 10 to 30% of the total scoring. Submitted by Jeff
> Fiedler, director of the Cavaliers
Voted down by staff members. The plan has merit but needs to thought out more
carefully. As I understand it, fans would be preselected and given sheets to use.
They would get a brief clinic and go to work. An alternative was floated that there
should be an applause award, called The People's Choice or something similar,
awarded to the corps with the biggest ovation.
> Proposal 2: Would allow brass, front-bell valve instruments in any key.
> Submitted by David Gibbs, director of the Blue Devils.
>
The thought here was yes, but no trombones or sousaphones. Instruments need to look
like bugles. Discussion centered around the ability of corps to secure more
favorable financial arrangements with the multitude of manufactures for Bb brass
and F mellophones. It was also felt that more used G bugles would be available at
reduced costs for corps who want to stay in G. No one is sure how this would be
implemented and when. Corps would probably wait to 2000 to switch.
> Proposal 3: To allow the use of amplification. Submitted by George Hopkins.
>
This proposal received the designation as the first choice of the brass and
percussion caucus. The major point was to allow players to employ correct
techniques, rather than pounding the instruments. It was felt that the keys and
instruments themselves would last longer offsetting the new equipment. Certainly a
small PA and a few microphones cost comparison to a new contra or marimba is
favorable. Also voice and brass could be miked as well.
> Proposal 4: Would allow for electronic instruments. Submitted by George
> Hopkins.
>
This was a close vote, but passed. I'll eat my tape recorder, if the directors vote
this in.
> Proposal 5: Would allow unlimited membership in open class corps. Submitted
> by George Hopkins.
>
The thought here was that many prospective members are excluded as they only want
to march in a certain corps. It was mentioned that Madison auditioned 73 sopranos
for 6 spots and that most of the people failing to make Cadets and Crossmen's
drumline are not interested in marching anywhere else. If you think, it does allow
more kids to march.
This didn't pass. A vote for 176, 4 buses, also failed. Perhaps the size will be
raised slightly as 3 buses can hold more than 128 as a compromise.
We will know what changes are in after next weekend. I will speculate only
amplification might pass and probably with a wattage restriction. Multi-key has
more support this time around, but will probably be a long shot. The sentiment is
growing for better instruments. We have played student quality horns for a very
long time. The change is coming.
This is my interpretation of the events, not my personal opinion. So don't bother
to flame me on any of this.
Jeff
Michael Cahill
DTaylor91 wrote:
> I really can't see the big deal behind this.
While I respect the points Don offers, there is simply a character to
bugles regardless
of how different/same as Bflat we all argue they are. Loose them if
favor of something else and drum corps looses part of it's uniqueness. Period.
> My reason for wanting it to pass is to have access to better quality
> instruments.
Again I can appreciate this point and those that followed. But I have
a question. How many corps can honestly afford to refit their brass
sections? We repeatedly hear how many (most?) corps are having
difficulty coming up with finances. So how is this proposal going to
help that situation?
Some corps will change over, others won't be able to afford it. In the
end we have a situation that is inequitable. Like it or not, the lines
with new instruments will have an advantage. I realize that this
situation exists to some degree already, but now we're talking about
DIFFERENT instruments.
> >Proposal 3: To allow the use of amplification. Submitted by George Hopkins.
>
> I hope this one passes as well. The issue here is not audibility, but the
> quality of what you hear.
My first response to this is simple. These instruments were never
designed to be played outdoors.
> The bigger issue is that the playing techniques used to get the amount of sound out of
> these instruments are nothing short of child abuse. Amplification would allow
> instructors to teach their students proper playing techniques, and allow audiences to
> hear these wonderful instruments as they were meant to be heard.
First off, you can play with good technique that doesn't remotely
resemble "child abuse" AND be heard. If you doubt it watch SCV and
Cavies to start with. If audiences REALLY want to hear these
instruments as they were meant to be heard, they should go to a
concert hall.
I find it hypocritical to push for amplification on the grounds of
"musicality" or how the instrument is meant to be heard when it was
never MEANT to be on a football field.
> Rain is not an issue. It can all be made waterproof (or covered), and powered by
> batteries.
Rain is very much an issue. So is time. So are malfunctions.
> IMO, even if these pass, it will still be drumcorps. The activity is more about
> the experience, and the life lessons learned, and the intense quest for
> perfection than it is about what kind of horn you play.
Don, it's also about the instrumentation. There is a legacy here that
can't be so easily dismissed. You sound just like Hopkins - "It's
about the experience, not the instruments". If it really isn't about
the instruments at all, why is it called DRUM and BUGLE corps?
Marching Band - not about the instruments. D&BC - ALL about the instruments.
> Don Taylor
Michael Cahill
Michael Cahill
DTaylor91 wrote:
> You just don't get the lushness of sound available from a lot of the keyboard
> instruments because of the way they have to be played to project over the brass
> and battery.
Well Don, you're not going to get "lushness" by pushing the sound
through loudspeakers or PA's . You'll get volume, along with hiss,
over driven highs and lows with very little in the middle. I've heard
it tried both at BOA and in professional concerts. It doesn't work.
You can't duplicate the acoustics of a concert hall on a football
field. No matter what you do.
> Of course sequencing shouldn't be allowed. It should be a relatively simple
> matter for the timing and penalties judge to check the equipment as it's being
> set up, to make sure there are nothing other than mics plugged into the sound
> board.
Provided he can tell the difference.
> There are battery powered amps (not very loud, but functional- Peavey makes a
> nice one) and power inverters available. Generators should NOT be allowed under
> any circumstances. I've also seen the weather and wear-and-tear issues solved,
> as well.
The bottom line is this requires corps to spend MORE money when in
general they need to be SAVING it.
> Don Taylor
Michael Cahill
SplinterGr
sound quality in the different brass instruments (G vs Bflat), but one thought
which DID occur to me after reading Jeff's post...
It's been noted that changing the key to more standardized (commonly available)
horns will increase the pool of good horns available - but should horn staffs
really be THAT concerned with having a "professional" sound? Before anyone goes
ballistic, follow me here.
One of the advantages (I'm even willing to allow "the ONLY advantage") of the
current instrumentation is that it forces horn players to think ANEW about
their horns. It re-inforces that this is NOT marching band. ONLY those kids
willing to make the effort and sacrifice to march in a corps can play these
horns, and in this aspect, playing a G bugle is actually a symbol of
achievement - not a beast of burden.
If, by going to multi-key instruments, we lose one of our truly unique aspects
- one which allows our participants, past and present, to relate to one
another, that thing lost will be ir-retrievable. We will, in fact, become more
and more just "marching bands", rather than a small, members-only society with
its own history. language and traditions.
Not everything which seems "obvious" or "more efficient" is necessarily worth
doing. The Levitts built houses like they were going out of style in the 1950's
- they could do this because their designs were "efficient" in materials and
construction ("easy to get and do" - hence "comptetively priced"). Frank Lloyd
Wright designed houses wo that each was imbued with an individual "code", and
they usually had more than their fair share of construction problems and cost
over-runs (painstakingly difficult to build).
Wright's houses are total artistic experiences - hard to build, inefficient to
requisition parts, but worth it.
Levitt's are....boxes on slabs.
Matt
Drrevcop
hahhahahahahahahahahahahahahhhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Howdy
Tony Rendleman
--
Tony Rendleman
Phantom Regiment Contrabass 98-01
cWo 4-life SUTA
"When in doubt, play loud!"
mik...@my-dejanews.com
frank...@aol.com (FrankAreMe) wrote:
>
> Proposal ID#A: Would require the judges at DCI Regionals and DCI
Championships
> to listen 90% of the time and talk only 10% of the time on their tapes.
> Submitted by James Messina.
>
Jimmy presented this?
I think that this could be handled internally by the judging community
without a 'rule' that is basically unenforceable. The goal at champs is to
focus on the performance of the moment, and not be concerned about improvment
suggestions, so I certainly agree that a constant chatter isn't called for.
Training could handle this in a sufficient manner.
>
> Proposal ID#B: Would require the judging panel at DCI finals to see each
corps
> at least once at the regionals. Submitted by Raymond Luniewski, director of
> Lake Erie Regiment
>
For division II and III this might be a tough one, as mentioned elsewhere, but
it SHOULD be the goal of whoever does the assignments, again without a 'rule'
that might not be possible to follow.
>
> Proposal 1: Would add crowd participation to the judging of weekend shows.
> The audience would have 10 to 30% of the total scoring. Submitted by Jeff
> Fiedler, director of the Cavaliers
>
I see by someone elses post (was it Jeff's?) that this may be handled by
selecting people from the stands and giving them some quick training and a
sheet. I'm not sure that this would work, although it might be nice to try as
an experiment, or as a speccial award type of thing.
> Should this pass--YES! It's about time for this. The fans have been largely
> ignored in the show design for most of the 1990's
and 80's and 70's and 60's and...
>which has led to decreased
> attendance at many shows.
No it hasn't.
>
> Proposal 2: Would allow brass, front-bell valve instruments in any key.
> Submitted by David Gibbs, director of the Blue Devils.
>
I hope this one passes; it's about time, esp for trumpets. Hopefully, the
quality of marching baris and mellos will improve for bands and corps if they
all use the same instruments, so it might be a win-win for band and corps in
those areas.
>
> Proposal 3: To allow the use of amplification. Submitted by George Hopkins.
>
> Should this pass---Emphatic no! George thinks pits can't be heard. Or solos.
> They can quite well. Pits have been known to overplay the brass at
> times---will that be solved if their amplified? Only with a good soundman.
> What about when it rains and the amps have to be shut off and covered? The
> soloist will actually have to play like he has a set, just like they always
> have.
>
It would be nice to see this pass, but it most likely won't.
> Proposal 4: Would allow for electronic instruments. Submitted by George
> Hopkins.
>
I'm not a big fan of electronic instruments in band, but I don't think they
should be prohibited, so to be consistent I think they should be allowed in DC
as well.
>
> Proposal 5: Would allow unlimited membership in open class corps. Submitted
> by George Hopkins.
>
I wouldn't mind this one passing. If a corps wants to field 250 kids, IMHO
they should be able to. You might have to put class sizes in competitions, as
is done for bands today, if there are many takers on this one.
>
> In conclusion--if proposals 2, 3. and 4 pass it is no longer drum corps. It
> would be some sort of inbred inbetween marching band and what was drum corps.
> Thankfully there will still be drum corps in the DCA and alumni corps.
>
Until they have to buy instruments and can't find G horns anymore.
Mike
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
DTaylor91
>> I really can't see the big deal behind this.
>
>While I respect the points Don offers, there is simply a character to
>bugles regardless
>of how different/same as Bflat we all argue they are. Loose them if
>favor of something else and drum corps looses part of it's uniqueness. Period.
>
OK, let me ask you this-When you're listening to an orchestra, can you tell,
unless you look closely, if the trumpet section is playing on Bb or C trumpets?
Or when the horn players switch from the F side of the instrument to the Bb
side?
>> My reason for wanting it to pass is to have access to better quality
>> instruments.
>
>Again I can appreciate this point and those that followed. But I have
>a question. How many corps can honestly afford to refit their brass
>sections? We repeatedly hear how many (most?) corps are having
>difficulty coming up with finances. So how is this proposal going to
>help that situation?
>
I know of at least three corps that haven't bought horns in quite some time,
waiting for a ruling to pass one way or the other, saving money for the vote
one way or the other. One of the main points I was trying to make is that a
bugle of the same quality as a well made trumpet costs twice as much (a simple
function of mass production vs. hand-built)
>Some corps will change over, others won't be able to afford it. In the
>end we have a situation that is inequitable. Like it or not, the lines
>with new instruments will have an advantage. I realize that this
>situation exists to some degree already, but now we're talking about
>DIFFERENT instruments.
>
>> >Proposal 3: To allow the use of amplification. Submitted by George
>Hopkins.
>>
>> I hope this one passes as well. The issue here is not audibility, but
>the
>> quality of what you hear.
>
>My first response to this is simple. These instruments were never
>designed to be played outdoors.
>
True, but the activity is using them now. Do we do away with them completely,
or do we give them the opportunity to sound as they were meant to sound, to be
played as they were meant to be played, and to last more than one season?
>> The bigger issue is that the playing techniques used to get the amount
>of sound out of
>> these instruments are nothing short of child abuse. Amplification would
>allow
>> instructors to teach their students proper playing techniques, and allow
>audiences to
>> hear these wonderful instruments as they were meant to be heard.
>
>First off, you can play with good technique that doesn't remotely
>resemble "child abuse" AND be heard. If you doubt it watch SCV and
>Cavies to start with. If audiences REALLY want to hear these
>instruments as they were meant to be heard, they should go to a
>concert hall.
>
I know those ensembles play well, but I would be willing to bet they would be
the first to give their students this opportunity.
>I find it hypocritical to push for amplification on the grounds of
>"musicality" or how the instrument is meant to be heard when it was
>never MEANT to be on a football field.
>
I say again, the activity is using them now, and has used them over 15 years,
they aren't going away, so let's give them the chance to be played well.
Hypocritical? Maybe, maybe not. To continue pounding on them to get them to
project over 64 brass? Asinine.
>> Rain is not an issue. It can all be made waterproof (or covered), and
>powered by
>> batteries.
>
>Rain is very much an issue. So is time. So are malfunctions.
>
Functionality can be improved, just as percussion intruments evolved to suit
the activity. I have seen rain and time dealt with very successfully. Let me
emphasize, not "heard about", SEEN.
>> IMO, even if these pass, it will still be drumcorps. The activity is more
>about
>> the experience, and the life lessons learned, and the intense quest for
>> perfection than it is about what kind of horn you play.
>
>Don, it's also about the instrumentation. There is a legacy here that
>can't be so easily dismissed. You sound just like Hopkins - "It's
>about the experience, not the instruments". If it really isn't about
>the instruments at all, why is it called DRUM and BUGLE corps?
They haven't been bugles since they added that first valve.
>Marching Band - not about the instruments. D&BC - ALL about the instruments.
>
If it was all about the instruments, then every HS in the nation would be able
to buy bugles, and totally duplicate our activity.
>
>Michael Cahill
Don Taylor
FrankAreMe
While you've been a big help in the past on questions and comments I've had, I
have to say that on these issues, you sound too much like Hopkins.
You make the comment that weather isn't an issue--I say B.S. I've seen it Don,
bands withdrawing from shows because it's raining--no lightening mind you, just
rain because it would mess up their electronics. Never mind the many times
I've done Army band gigs in the rain and the woodwinds haven't. Or been
forced to go without gloves in cold weather because clarinet and flute people
can't wear gloves and play. So, weather is a factor here. Oh, did I mention
that the guitar player next to me (I was playing bass) got zapped big time
because our director was stupid enough to keep going in the rain?
Miked solos--I've soloed for years, never used a crutch. Most corps soloists
have been the same way on the field, you can hear them over anything. Same way
with the pit--listen to the cd's or records---how many times do you hear the
pit drowning everything out?
Sound board--ok, so if this unfortunately passes--who runs it? Is "sound
technician" judged? Will there be more than a 17 minute time for corps to set
up, perform and tear down since each corps would have to have a sound check,
which can take quite a bit. If I remember right, wasn't the performance time
shortened so shows would last all night and/or an extra corps could be added to
the line up.
I can see it now--just for 10 minute show, each corps would have no more than
30 minutes to set up their sound, do a sound check, etc. And then about 10
minutes to tear down the amps, mics, sound board etc. So it's now up to 50
minutes instead of 17. Fans, if there are any left if these things pass, would
now be treated to a three corps line up. Wow!
Don, it's not about the experience, it's about what drum corps is. I didn't
have the experience in bands that I've had in drum corps.. That's why I'm
marching drum corps again and not doing band. Because it's not the
same--instrumentation, identity OR experience.
Like I said, if the all-key and electronic proposals pass, drum corps becomes
an inbred. It's not going to bring new members, it's not going to bring new
fans. Name me one rule change in instrumentation that has done that!
Larry Girard is right, if this does come to pass, what interest will Kanstul
and DEG have to make quality bugles...there's not enough Sr's and alumni to
buy them for them to make money. Then, all that would be left is marching
bands, some with woodwinds and some without who would still have the audacity
to call themselves drum corps and DCI and BOA will really be one big happy
family forever and ever because there will no longer be any distinctions
between the two.
DTaylor91
>DTaylor91 wrote:
>
>> You just don't get the lushness of sound available from a lot of the
keyboard
>> instruments because of the way they have to be played to project over
>the brass
>> and battery.
>
>Well Don, you're not going to get "lushness" by pushing the sound
>through loudspeakers or PA's . You'll get volume, along with hiss,
>over driven highs and lows with very little in the middle. I've heard
>it tried both at BOA and in professional concerts. It doesn't work.
>
>You can't duplicate the acoustics of a concert hall on a football
>field. No matter what you do.
I've heard it done as well. The hiss can be dealt with, and with a decent set
up can't be heard unless no one is playing, and you're standing within 5 feet
of the speaker, if you have decent equipment.
At any rate, it sounds a lot better than pounding the bejeezus <sp?> out of the
keys.
>
>> Of course sequencing shouldn't be allowed. It should be a relatively simple
>> matter for the timing and penalties judge to check the equipment as it's
>being
>> set up, to make sure there are nothing other than mics plugged into the
>sound
>> board.
>
>Provided he can tell the difference.
>
It should not take more than 5 minutes to teach someone the difference.
>> There are battery powered amps (not very loud, but functional- Peavey
>makes a
>> nice one) and power inverters available. Generators should NOT be allowed
>under
>> any circumstances. I've also seen the weather and wear-and-tear issues
>solved,
>> as well.
>
>The bottom line is this requires corps to spend MORE money when in
>general they need to be SAVING it.
>
No, it does not. I just purchased a concert grand marimba for my band. $2900. A
Peavey130 watt per channel power amp and two heavy speakers were $400 (I know
that may be a little small for outdoors, but it should be less than a grand for
a system with enough "lungs") I expect the marimba I bought to last more than
20 years. It would be good for two seasons at most if it was being used by a
drumcorps. The instruments would last MUCH longer if amplified and played
properly. I suggest that it would SAVE money.
>
>Michael Cahill
Don Taylor
FrankAreMe
>able
>to buy bugles, and totally duplicate our activity.
>
>>
You mean Kanstul and DEG would turn them down if they tried???
Little story---back when this Bb vs. G debate came around about 1994 or 95,
Bill Cook sent me a copy of Star of Indiana/Canadian Brass cd so I could tell
that there is no difference. Guess, what, there is! The selections played on
the "non-traditional G" instruments, as they're called on the cd cover, are
more exiting and better played than on the band instruments.
Isn't part of music education being exposed, if not learn how to play different
instruments..or even the same instrument in different key versions (like Bb or
C trumpets etc). What is so terrible about learning to play horns in the key
of G? Nothing! It's an accomplishment to master a G bugle. It's an
accomplishment to play an instrument in any key other than your major
instrument. Why take that away from drum corps?
FrankAreMe
>
>Mike
And then the bands will have won because there will be no more drum corps.
Only those who can maintain the instruments to make them last will survive, and
they will eventually die out when their replacements coming from the future
inbred thing that was once drum corps take over DCA and the alums.
Michael Cahill
DTaylor91 wrote:
> OK, let me ask you this-When you're listening to an orchestra, can you tell,
> unless you look closely, if the trumpet section is playing on Bb or C trumpets?
> Or when the horn players switch from the F side of the instrument to the Bb
> side?
To be honest I can't. But an orchestra is comprised of a variety of
melodic instruments. A drum corps - only brass. Change the key and you
can hear a difference.
> One of the main points I was trying to make is that a
> bugle of the same quality as a well made trumpet costs twice as much (a simple
> function of mass production vs. hand-built)
I understand the situation, and can see your point. Perhaps we could
encourage HS marching bands to switch to bugles, thereby lowering the
cost for all. <g>
The decline in drum corps is as much a factor in this as anything.
Fewer corps = fewer bugles produced. I'd rather see corps grow with
original instrumentation (regardless of how many valves they have)
than to switch to Bflat instruments.
> >My first response to this is simple. These instruments were never
> >designed to be played outdoors.
> >
> True, but the activity is using them now. Do we do away with them completely,
> or do we give them the opportunity to sound as they were meant to sound, to be
> played as they were meant to be played, and to last more than one season?
Don that's an all or nothing argument, and it doesn't hold water. I
never said do away with them. Just use better technique. They will
never sound as they were meant to on a football field simply by
amplifying them, period. That is a myth
> >First off, you can play with good technique that doesn't remotely
> >resemble "child abuse" AND be heard. If you doubt it watch SCV and
> >Cavies to start with. If audiences REALLY want to hear these
> >instruments as they were meant to be heard, they should go to a
> >concert hall.
> >
> I know those ensembles play well, but I would be willing to bet they would be
> the first to give their students this opportunity.
But the point remains that good technique can and IS an option to
amplification. It doesn't require a corps to lug PA's and batteries on
the field.
> >I find it hypocritical to push for amplification on the grounds of
> >"musicality" or how the instrument is meant to be heard when it was
> >never MEANT to be on a football field.
> >
> I say again, the activity is using them now, and has used them over 15 years,
> they aren't going away, so let's give them the chance to be played well.
It's erroneous to assume they'll be "played well" simply by adding
speakers. Playing well requires good technique which is taught.
> Hypocritical? Maybe, maybe not. To continue pounding on them to get them to
> project over 64 brass? Asinine.
Again, look at SCV and Cavs and many other pits. They don't POUND,
they play with good technique and can be heard. The technique needs to change.
> Functionality can be improved, just as percussion intruments evolved to suit
> the activity. I have seen rain and time dealt with very successfully. Let me
> emphasize, not "heard about", SEEN.
I've seen bands and winter lines that couldn't play when their amp or
power source crapped out. One top 5 line in Dayton phased badly when
their amp died - they couldn't adjust to playing without amplification.
My opinion is amplification is the foot in the door for electronic
instruments. Add it and soon we'll have marching bass guitars and
keyboards. No thanks.
> They haven't been bugles since they added that first valve.
Well, they're not trumpets.
> >Marching Band - not about the instruments. D&BC - ALL about the instruments.
> >
> If it was all about the instruments, then every HS in the nation would be able
> to buy bugles, and totally duplicate our activity.
I don't see your logic at all. MB ARE attempting to duplicate our
activity sans bugles - just check the repertoires of bands at BOA for
the last 10 years.
My point above is that the very name of this activity indicates how
important the instrumentation is. A marching band can use any
instrument, while a drum and bugle corps quite clearly spells out what
will be in use. That's no accident.
> Don Taylor
Michael Cahill
Scott Gordon
: >Fiedler, director of the Cavaliers
Wouldn't that cause the home corps to be ranked possibly higher than deserved?
Scott
Michael Cahill
DTaylor91 wrote:
>
> Michael Cahill wrote:
>
> >Well Don, you're not going to get "lushness" by pushing the sound
> >through loudspeakers or PA's . You'll get volume, along with hiss,
> >over driven highs and lows with very little in the middle. I've heard
> >it tried both at BOA and in professional concerts. It doesn't work.
> >
> >You can't duplicate the acoustics of a concert hall on a football
> >field. No matter what you do.
>
> I've heard it done as well. The hiss can be dealt with, and with a decent set
> up can't be heard unless no one is playing, and you're standing within 5 feet
> of the speaker, if you have decent equipment.
The point is they won't sound "lush" with or without decent equipment.
> At any rate, it sounds a lot better than pounding the bejeezus <sp?> out of the
> keys.
Which is why technique needs to change for some pits.
> >The bottom line is this requires corps to spend MORE money when in
> >general they need to be SAVING it.
> >
> No, it does not. I just purchased a concert grand marimba for my band. $2900. A
> Peavey130 watt per channel power amp and two heavy speakers were $400 (I know
> that may be a little small for outdoors, but it should be less than a grand for
> a system with enough "lungs") I expect the marimba I bought to last more than
> 20 years. It would be good for two seasons at most if it was being used by a
> drumcorps. The instruments would last MUCH longer if amplified and played
> properly. I suggest that it would SAVE money.
A marimba will last if it's kept indoors - expose it to the elements
and regardless of how it's played it won't. Are you using your
marimba in marching band or outdoors?
I've seen some pits who take excellent care of their gear and play
without "pounding" on the instruments, yet they still replace the keys
regularly due to the elements, humidity especially.
As long as these instruments are used outdoors you'll have to replace
them. Amplification will not protect them from damage.
The top 12 corps will most likely get free gear - sponsorships - for
amplification. The smaller corps with less money will have to pay for
everything. This is already the case for pit equipment.
This isn't about saving money.
> >Michael Cahill
>
> Don Taylor
Michael Cahill
mik...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> In article <19990124173857...@ng-fi1.aol.com>,
> frank...@aol.com (FrankAreMe) wrote:
>
> > Proposal 1: Would add crowd participation to the judging of weekend shows.
> > The audience would have 10 to 30% of the total scoring. Submitted by Jeff
> > Fiedler, director of the Cavaliers
>>
> > Should this pass--YES! It's about time for this. The fans have been largely
> > ignored in the show design for most of the 1990's
>
> and 80's and 70's and 60's and...
Actually the fans weren't ignored in those years. Shows were created
using music that was accessible.
> >which has led to decreased attendance at many shows.
>
> No it hasn't.
Oh, well if you say so, then it must be true. Have any facts that back
this up?
> > Proposal 2: Would allow brass, front-bell valve instruments in any key.
> > Submitted by David Gibbs, director of the Blue Devils.
> >
> I hope this one passes; it's about time, esp for trumpets. Hopefully, the
> quality of marching baris and mellos will improve for bands and corps if they
> all use the same instruments, so it might be a win-win for band and corps in
> those areas.
Bands get better instruments, corps lose their uniqueness - Win/Lose.
> I'm not a big fan of electronic instruments in band, but I don't think they
> should be prohibited, so to be consistent I think they should be allowed in DC
> as well.
Consistent with what? Any reason corps should adhere to what bands use
as instrumentation? Last I checked they weren't competing against one
another on the field.
> Mike
Michael
nhs...@my-dejanews.com
wrong" only opinions.
I do want to compliment Don, Mike, Jeff, Frank etc.... on conducting a
civilized debate, on a serious issue, without resulting in a "knock down drag
out,"you suck"..."no YOU suck"" WAR.
Maybe RAMD is heading back in the right direction.
Later, AA
dcik...@my-dejanews.com
msco...@aol.com (MScout008) wrote:
> >Proposal 1: Would add crowd participation to the judging of weekend shows.
> >The audience would have 10 to 30% of the total scoring. Submitted by Jeff
> >Fiedler, director of the Cavaliers
>
> such a thing! hehe. Thank god I'm not in Scouts to win, but rather the
> experience of playing with such an awesome group. I think it will be cooler
to
> get 15 minutes of gratification from the fans rather than a couple seconds of
> gratification from the judges. Sorry about that...just wanted to get that off
> my chest.
>
> Stephen Bond 008
> May You Never Walk Alone
> Madison Scouts Euphonium 99
> -----------------------------------------------------
> Carolina Crown 97
> Bayou City Blues 98
>
>
shut the fuck up. when scouts start showing up at critique, then they can
complain about how they never win.
cd...@vagabonds.org
I think that you did a wonderful summary of the event. The weekend was both
thought provoking and healthy for the entire community, if my opinion. To my
fellow RAMDers, please realize that all concerns and sides were addressed at the
weekend meeting. Everyone has some concern about the "hard core" fans who feel
that the activity is moving in a negative direction, and their reaction to the
passage of these proposals. I don't think the instructional community is in any
way trying to create "summer marching band" for the youth involved in our
activity. These recommended changes have the possibility to both turn kids on to
the activity, or off completly to drum corps as an option. In many of the
instructors opinions, the activity has simply ceased to evolve. It has been in
several years since any significant change was made in the activity. I think
many of them feel that the electronics and amplification issues has been proven
to work in the band enviroment where they already have access to MANY additional
textures and seniorities. I agree that there can be electronic meltdowns during
a performance. And I strongly believe that the judges will take the positives
and negatives under consideration when putting down a number, just as they do at
present.
I use the elecronics proposal as only a small example of what is on the table
here. I am really glad that this information broke here on RAMD as I am sure the
discussion will be passionate if nothing else. I just hope that everyone in here
takes to time to become familiar with BOTH viewpoints. I know there are many on
here that feel: A) 2 valve bugles shouldn't be allowed, B) the judges system is
corrupt, C) the activity is all about the designers D) drum corps is boring
(refer to letter "C"), E)no tics = sloppy shows, F) the acticity is dying. I am
also aware that some people feel that clarinets and banjos are ok to put on the
drum corps field and 350 people playing gold trumpets and an all electronic
field percussion is the way to go. I (as probably most of you) fit somewhere in
between. Please just try to keep your possibilities open as we debate this
information. It still amazes me that those people who feel the whole activity is
going to hell, STILL get on here and post. That says quite alot about just how
dedicated this community really is. I still watch some of the programs over the
summer in complete disbelief that instructors can get young people to do some of
the amazing things they can do. I think many people would agree that the kids
who do marching in drum corps leave with something much bigger than they came
with.
I am rambling now and will stop!
Dave Campbell
Director
General Butler Vagabonds
DCM Board Member
PS: Hoppy was not at the meeting!
In article <36ABFCF4...@prodigy.net>, Jeff says...
>
>I'll try to summarize the discussion as I wait for the latex primer to dry in my
>hallway. Once it is dry I'm going to bed.
>
>The Instructor Judge College held in Chicago last weekend devoted much time to
>these proposals and sent recommendations to the board. Before anyone gets crazy,
>The brass caucus voted unanimously for 3 valve G bugles in 1975. The directors
>unanimously said no.
>
>FrankAreMe wrote:
>
>> These are the proposals that will be voted on next weekend (Jan 29-31) at the
>> DCI Rules Congress, with my comments. These are taken directly from the
>> February 1999 issue of Drum Corps World.
>>
>
>The Rules Congress was last weekend Jan 16-18. Each corps present had one vote
>Sunday on each proposal. The corps have two weeks time to vote as in the past
>staff
>would vote for a proposal and find little time to meet with their director to
>discuss the pros and cons. The voting will be limited to the top 21 on 1998.
>
>>Proposal ID#A: Would require the judges at DCI Regionals and DCI Championships
>> to listen 90% of the time and talk only 10% of the time on their tapes.
>> Submitted by James Messina.
>
>This was delegated out to the judging heads. Probably won't be employed, but
>there
>is no rule on how much to talk at present. As a vet Finals judge, I don't say as
>much simply to focus on the score. That is what matters, there is no tomorrow.
>Each
>judge should find a way to be comfortable at big shows. Talking less is an
>option.
>
>>Proposal ID#B: Would require the judging panel at DCI finals to see each corps
>> at least once at the regionals. Submitted by Raymond Luniewski, director of
>> Lake Erie Regiment
>>
>
>Same here to the judging team. This was for Division 2/3 as open Class corps do
>get
>to see all judges via the Focus weekends. The problem is getting all judges to
>see
>all possible finalists at the 2/3 level. It is logistically tough as there are
>more
>corps, but we should see if we can do a better job.
>
>>
>>
>> Proposal 1: Would add crowd participation to the judging of weekend shows.
>> The audience would have 10 to 30% of the total scoring. Submitted by Jeff
>> Fiedler, director of the Cavaliers
>
>Voted down by staff members. The plan has merit but needs to thought out more
>carefully. As I understand it, fans would be preselected and given sheets to
>use.
>They would get a brief clinic and go to work. An alternative was floated that
>there
>should be an applause award, called The People's Choice or something similar,
>awarded to the corps with the biggest ovation.
>
>> Proposal 2: Would allow brass, front-bell valve instruments in any key.
>> Submitted by David Gibbs, director of the Blue Devils.
>>
>
>The thought here was yes, but no trombones or sousaphones. Instruments need to
>look
>like bugles. Discussion centered around the ability of corps to secure more
>favorable financial arrangements with the multitude of manufactures for Bb brass
>and F mellophones. It was also felt that more used G bugles would be available
>at
>reduced costs for corps who want to stay in G. No one is sure how this would be
>implemented and when. Corps would probably wait to 2000 to switch.
>
>> Proposal 3: To allow the use of amplification. Submitted by George Hopkins.
>>
>
>This proposal received the designation as the first choice of the brass and
>percussion caucus. The major point was to allow players to employ correct
>techniques, rather than pounding the instruments. It was felt that the keys and
>instruments themselves would last longer offsetting the new equipment. Certainly
>a
>small PA and a few microphones cost comparison to a new contra or marimba is
>favorable. Also voice and brass could be miked as well.
>
>> Proposal 4: Would allow for electronic instruments. Submitted by George
>> Hopkins.
>>
>
>This was a close vote, but passed. I'll eat my tape recorder, if the directors
>vote
>this in.
>
>> Proposal 5: Would allow unlimited membership in open class corps. Submitted
>> by George Hopkins.
>>
>
MIKE DUFFY
FrankAreMe wrote:
> These are the proposals that will be voted on next weekend (Jan 29-31) at the
> DCI Rules Congress, with my comments. These are taken directly from the
> February 1999 issue of Drum Corps World.
>
> Proposal ID#A: Would require the judges at DCI Regionals and DCI Championships
> to listen 90% of the time and talk only 10% of the time on their tapes.
> Submitted by James Messina.
>
> Should this pass--Yes.
Ya sure ya betch ya!We want to hears da tunes, not da comments!!
Comments during "Tasteful Brass Tacits" only!!!
Proposal 5: Would allow unlimited membership in open class corps. Submitted
> by George Hopkins.
>
Two hundred "Horns in G and woodwind free" on a comment free
tape (also free:-)!!
MJPUDSTER
>shut the fuck up. when scouts start showing up at critique, then they can
>complain about how they never win.
>
Now there's an intelligent retort.
"Could this planet be some other planet's hell?"
MJPUDSTER
>: >Proposal 1: Would add crowd participation to the judging of weekend
>shows.
>: >The audience would have 10 to 30% of the total scoring. Submitted by Jeff
>: >Fiedler, director of the Cavaliers
>
>Wouldn't that cause the home corps to be ranked possibly higher than
>deserved?
>
>Scott
I guess that would mean that each DCI Corps would win at least one show. I can
see that as a reason for not allowing the people who pay to see the activity a
reason to participate in it's outcome.
FrankAreMe
First off, let me say that I totally enjoyed the Vagabonds in 1998. They were
one of the most refreshing corps on the field in several years and it was a
pleasure covering them for Drum Corps World at DCM prelims!
Now on to your post:
>These recommended changes have the possibility to both turn kids on to
>the activity, or off completly to drum corps as an option
There will be defections, both from members and fans if 2 through 4 are
approved. The only new people you'll get are the one's who are completely
clueless as to what drum corps was all about and the traditions and history.
>In many of the
>instructors opinions, the activity has simply ceased to evolve. It has been
>in
>several years since any significant change was made in the activity
Why is that a bad thing? Are they wanting to change just for the sake of
changing because they haven't done anything drastic for several years? That
would be like Congress saying--well we've haven't had a huge tax increase for a
few years so we might as well have one now.
> I think
>many of them feel that the electronics and amplification issues has been
>proven
>to work in the band enviroment where they already have access to MANY
>additional
>textures and seniorities.
Perhaps, but why lose the uniqueness of drum corps just because something may
work for marching band?
As George Hopkins said back in 1995---
> Amplification - to me it looks like a no brainer. More kids --
Now if that is the logic I would really like it explained to me. A solo mike
on the field is going to attract more kids? Plugged-in marimbas are going to
have hoards of new bodies breaking down the doors to the audition of their
choice?
These proposals make me think there is some sort of identity crisis in drum
corps. A few see BOA and see huge bands with guitars, synthesizers and
whatever else one can plug in and think--That's it! If we had that we would be
massive! So to them, the only answer is to make us more like bands! Once
electronics, amplification, multi-keyed brass are legal, drum corps will be
nothing more than a brass band. It won't be drum corps, it won't be band. It
will be an inbred version of both that will lose more fans (and thus revenue)
than it will take in.
Now the general reasoning for all this is to 1) get more kids and 2) get more
fans in the stands.
About number 2---are posters advertising shows going to say things like "NOW
WITH GUITARS AND MICROPHONES FOR SOLOISTS!!!--DRUM AND BUGLE CORPS APPEARING
AT THE 20TH ANNUAL BEAT AND BLAST 1999 SPONSORED BY ......" or something to
that effect? If I were a novice fan seeing that, would it turn me on? I doubt
it because it wouldn't make sense--drums, bugles..guitars?
Other questions--if there is going to be amplification that automatically
assumes two things---a sound technician (will this be a staff member or corps
member since it's use during a show would detirmine how well a show
does---staff members can't do that now) and sound checks. Will extra time be
allocated for that? Sure they can test everything outside of the
stadium---just another distraction to the fans inside that isn't penalized now
but should be--but once they are inside you have a whole different accoustical
environment. Do they redo the sound check?
Maybe these things will come to pass sometime in the long range future. Like I
said, if those three proposals are approved, many many thousands are gone as
fans and financial supporters. I can see it now though, Marilyn Manson doing
promos for the Cadets of Bergen County because they use the same guitars
his/her group does! Wouldn't that be a pretty picture!
Whew
>PS: Hoppy was not at the meeting!
What a blessing! :) But he'll be at the next one!
Frank
cd...@vagabonds.org
>
>I have my own opinions on this issue, but this is a debate with no "right or
>wrong" only opinions.
>
>I do want to compliment Don, Mike, Jeff, Frank etc.... on conducting a
>civilized debate, on a serious issue, without resulting in a "knock down drag
>out,"you suck"..."no YOU suck"" WAR.
>
>Maybe RAMD is heading back in the right direction.
>
>
>Later, AA
>
cd...@vagabonds.org
says...
>
>Dave,
>
>First off, let me say that I totally enjoyed the Vagabonds in 1998. They were
>one of the most refreshing corps on the field in several years and it was a
>pleasure covering them for Drum Corps World at DCM prelims!
Thanks for you encouragement regarding the Vagabonds 98 production. I hope that
someone, someday will recognize that we are trying to produce entertaining
programs that still have the "staples" the activity requires! I appreciate your
kind words. I will try to address the rest of your issues within the message
itself.
>
>Now on to your post:
>
>>These recommended changes have the possibility to both turn kids on to
>>the activity, or off completly to drum corps as an option
>
>There will be defections, both from members and fans if 2 through 4 are
>approved. The only new people you'll get are the one's who are completely
>clueless as to what drum corps was all about and the traditions and history.
Most of the members I have spoken with (from a few corps....not all) have told
me they think DCI is way behind in the implemetation of these changes. To the
kids, the electronics revolution has arrived. I can take a 10 year old kid and
have him playing music on an electronic keyboard in 15 minutes. They all have
computers that can produce and help them compose music. They see and hear
electronic music in just about everything they see (except drum corps of
course). Some of them feel the corps activity as dying because it has not
changed with the times. I think that the paranoia that runs through people at
the thought of this stuff is causing more harm and panic than is useful for any
aspect of the activity. If the fans leave soley because there is a microphone on
a marimba and the vibe motor is plugged in, or the soloist has a microphone in
front of him....the activity is doomed and the "fans" are fair weather! But to
hold the notion that the activity should remain "pure" and never try to utilize
the modern technology avaliable and already proven to work is too me a sure sign
of the death of the activity as well.
>
>>In many of the
>>instructors opinions, the activity has simply ceased to evolve. It has been
>>in
>>several years since any significant change was made in the activity
>
>Why is that a bad thing? Are they wanting to change just for the sake of
>changing because they haven't done anything drastic for several years? That
>would be like Congress saying--well we've haven't had a huge tax increase for a
>few years so we might as well have one now.
>
Or like, the Russians have the bomb but we still like machine guns? The changes
are being considered because they have NOT done anything for several years, and
it shows. There are less corps right now than ever in the history of the
activity. The reasons for this are vast and cannot all be blamed on the
activities lack of growth. However, some of these changes might possibly cause a
new type of kid to become a member. A piano player, or a college trumpet major
who thinks the bugle will harm his chops. Sponserships from Roland and Yahama
for brass insruments and synthesizers, Shure and Peavey for amplification. This
means more money to sponser contest with, do PR to get more people in, and
essentially more cash in the pockets of the drum corps and the governing body.
Money that can be utilized to give the children of the actitiy better
instruction, instruments, tours, etc..for not only a better experience from the
activity, but a greater love of music as a whole. Not many kids come out of drum
corps and get a full time gig playing snare drum or sitting first chair split
lead soprano in a symphony. Therefore the case can be made the the activity does
nothing more than promote itself, not it's children. No matter what the outcome
of the evolution questions...this is something the activity should be looking at
as a community, not individual corps.
>> I think
>>many of them feel that the electronics and amplification issues has been
>>proven
>>to work in the band enviroment where they already have access to MANY
>>additional
>>textures and seniorities.
>
>Perhaps, but why lose the uniqueness of drum corps just because something may
>work for marching band?
Quite simply, (opinion) the ideas are beginning to stagniate. We are seeing the
same 25 pieces of music being played time and time again. Corps are scrambling
to find new material that is difficult, challenging, yet entertaining. You can
only do so much with brass and percussion within the confines of pre-written
compositions. I really don't think that the use of a JV-90 synth in the pit will
ruin the activity as long as the sounds are generated in real time by a
performer. If the activity fails to at least consider the prospects of life with
electronics, I think they are short changing the kids.\, and the fans. The
judging community will accept these changes simply becasue the will have too! I
have not heard of a judge who openly fears the electronics and amplification
issues because it will change the essence of the activity. Electronics and
multiple keyed brass instruments are today, what 3 valve bugles and and the
"Pit" was yesterday. How much has the drum corps suffered because of the third
valve, or the addition of a full size marimba instead of a 2 1/2 octave one that
is carried? In my opinion the only effects have been positives one if for no
other reason than the credibility they give "non-corps" people.
>
>As George Hopkins said back in 1995---
>> Amplification - to me it looks like a no brainer. More kids --
>
>Now if that is the logic I would really like it explained to me. A solo mike
>on the field is going to attract more kids? Plugged-in marimbas are going to
>have hoards of new bodies breaking down the doors to the audition of their
>choice?
>
I don't have enough balls to speak for George. Are you sure this was said
regading amplification and not electronics? The case could be made that new
instruments would cause growth because of differnt types of kids needed to play
them. I don't think amplification will greatly effect the amount of members in
the corps one way or another. What I do think is a shame, however, is that so
many people have bashed Hopkins on this newsgroup that he no longer posts to it.
I am interested in his views on this esp. since he vreated the proposals.
>These proposals make me think there is some sort of identity crisis in drum
>corps. A few see BOA and see huge bands with guitars, synthesizers and
>whatever else one can plug in and think--That's it! If we had that we would be
>massive! So to them, the only answer is to make us more like bands! Once
>electronics, amplification, multi-keyed brass are legal, drum corps will be
>nothing more than a brass band. It won't be drum corps, it won't be band. It
>will be an inbred version of both that will lose more fans (and thus revenue)
>than it will take in.
Look over your BOA stuff. You will find that smaller schools beat up on big ones
more frequently than you think. BOA streeses QUALITY, the same as drum corps.
Big does not mean better (I had a corps that proved that last year) We decided
to take the quality approach as opposed to seeking any and all members to march.
We were quite happy with the outcome.
I do agree with you that DCI is having an identity crisis of sorts. I think that
is a major part of why these proposals have made it this far. Do we keep the
staus quo? I walked on the field in Orlando and saw 900 people for Div II/III
finals. Is that what we want instead? We had the smallest turnout in Orlando in
many years because of what? location? lack of entertainment? no tics? There are
significant problems within the activity in part due to the people who want it
to remain "pure" yet do nothing to help local organizations recruit kids or
increase attendance at shows. I don't have an answer here, just many more
questions we need answered. If any of these proposals pass I am sure we will see
a change in the box office. Whether that is good or bad is not for me to answer.
>
>Now the general reasoning for all this is to 1) get more kids and 2) get more
>fans in the stands.
>
>About number 2---are posters advertising shows going to say things like "NOW
>WITH GUITARS AND MICROPHONES FOR SOLOISTS!!!--DRUM AND BUGLE CORPS APPEARING
>AT THE 20TH ANNUAL BEAT AND BLAST 1999 SPONSORED BY ......" or something to
>that effect? If I were a novice fan seeing that, would it turn me on? I doubt
>it because it wouldn't make sense--drums, bugles..guitars?
>
>Other questions--if there is going to be amplification that automatically
>assumes two things---a sound technician (will this be a staff member or corps
>member since it's use during a show would detirmine how well a show
>does---staff members can't do that now) and sound checks. Will extra time be
>allocated for that? Sure they can test everything outside of the
>stadium---just another distraction to the fans inside that isn't penalized now
>but should be--but once they are inside you have a whole different accoustical
>environment. Do they redo the sound check?
This is a sore point within the amplification proposal. It is my understanding
that if the proposal passes, it is bounced back to the task force members to
find the best way and timeline for implementation. All I know about it is what I
have learned from the WGI system which is currently in place and not geared for
outdoor competition.
>
>Maybe these things will come to pass sometime in the long range future. Like I
>said, if those three proposals are approved, many many thousands are gone as
>fans and financial supporters. I can see it now though, Marilyn Manson doing
>promos for the Cadets of Bergen County because they use the same guitars
>his/her group does! Wouldn't that be a pretty picture!
>
Then it appears to me that these people are supporting vicarious living through
the youth in the activity and are not there for entertainment. I remember how
many people stopped going to NFL games when they were using the instant reply
rule........oh...now I remember....NO ONE
>Whew
I agree with that!!
>
>>PS: Hoppy was not at the meeting!
>
>What a blessing! :) But he'll be at the next one!
>
>Frank
Frank,
Of course there is no easy answer to these questions. I highly doubt that my
corps would be out grabbing up all the subwoolfers and amps we can get our hands
on when it passes. I just think that the examination of these ideas needs to
take place. When 17 out of 19 corps instructors vote to have amplification in
the drum corps activity, it sends a pretty strong signal out that the times
might be changing!
Good sparing my friend!
Dave
DTaylor91
>Don,
>
>While you've been a big help in the past on questions and comments I've
>had, I
>have to say that on these issues, you sound too much like Hopkins.
>
Is this supposed to be an insult?
I'm sorry, but I'm very capable of thinking for myself. In fact, George and I
would probably not see all this the same way. You know what? NOBODY sees
everything the same way, and that's OK.
>You make the comment that weather isn't an issue--I say B.S. I've seen
>it Don,
>bands withdrawing from shows because it's raining--no lightening mind you,
Well, All I can tell you is that I have seen it work, and work well. It CAN be
done, and I can put you in otuch with the people that have learned to make it
work, if you like.
>Miked solos--I've soloed for years, never used a crutch. Most corps soloists
>have been the same way on the field, you can hear them over anything. Same
>way
>with the pit--listen to the cd's or records---how many times do you hear
> the
>pit drowning everything out?
>
Again, from my point of view, it's not a volume issue, it's a quality of sound
and equipment durability issue.
>Sound board--ok, so if this unfortunately passes--who runs it? Is "sound
>technician" judged? Will there be more than a 17 minute time for corps
>to set
>up, perform and tear down since each corps would have to have a sound check,
>which can take quite a bit. If I remember right, wasn't the performance
>time
>shortened so shows would last all night and/or an extra corps could be added
>to
>the line up.
>I can see it now--just for 10 minute show, each corps would have no more
>than
>30 minutes to set up their sound, do a sound check, etc. And then about
>10
>minutes to tear down the amps, mics, sound board etc. So it's now up to
>50
>minutes instead of 17. Fans, if there are any left if these things pass,
>would
>now be treated to a three corps line up. Wow!
>
I think you're overreacting. It's simple, the sound tech is a member, is in the
pit box, is part of the 128 allotment. As far as sound checks are concerned,
proper care of equipment, and adequate rehearsals take care of this. Sound
checks aren't allowed in BOA except as part of the normal time alloted to set
up on the field, which happens to be the same as DCI currently allows. If the
band I work with can do it, a drumcorps can do it.
>Don, it's not about the experience, it's about what drum corps is. I didn't
>have the experience in bands that I've had in drum corps.. That's why
>I'm
>marching drum corps again and not doing band. Because it's not the
>same--instrumentation, identity OR experience.
>
Maybe I reading the above incorrectly, but you seem to contradict yourself, so
I'll leave this for now.
>Like I said, if the all-key and electronic proposals pass, drum corps becomes
>an inbred. It's not going to bring new members, it's not going to bring
>new
>fans. Name me one rule change in instrumentation that has done that!
>
No rule changes have brought in new fans or new members, you're right. The only
thing that will bring more fans is the quality of the product, and the only
thing that will bring more members is improving the quality of their
experience. I think that these two proposals can do just that. You obviously
don't, and that's OK.
>Larry Girard is right, if this does come to pass, what interest will Kanstul
>and DEG have to make quality bugles...there's not enough Sr's and alumni
>to
>buy them for them to make money. Then, all that would be left is marching
>bands, some with woodwinds and some without who would still have the audacity
>to call themselves drum corps and DCI and BOA will really be one big happy
>family forever and ever because there will no longer be any distinctions
>between the two.
>
You're right, they wouldn't be interested in making G bugles anymore. Both
companies also manufacture Bb and F Marching instruments, as well as "legit"
horns.
The distinction would be clear: One would have woodwinds, one would not. The
approach, the goals set, the intensity level taken towards achieving those
goals, the ability to focus on just that activity for a summer, (in other
words, "the experience") would also differentiate the two.
I have to put this thought out: To someone not familiar with either activity,
they appear to be no different already. (Yes, this is in a way, a bad thing. It
has to do with a level of precision and excellence problem, and a quality
problem IMO, but that's another debate).
Understand, I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm simply trying to better
clarify my position, in case anyone's actually reading this. :^)
Don Taylor
Jeff Wise
>
> Obviously, you are not much of a football fan because the Super Bowl
> is *next* weekend. :)
>
> In article <36ABE45F...@bellsouth.net>,
> Jeff Wise <wise...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >(surprising this is getting voted on during the Super Bowl
> >weekend, guess the Falcons really don't interest that many
Actually, I know it's this coming weekend. Frank's original post
(of which I must've deleted that part) mentioned the 30th and 31st
as the dates for this director's meeting.
Jeff Wise
Andy Smith
earlier post, so take it easy. If you read it again, you'll find out he
was just making a statement.
May You Never Walk Alone,
Andy Smith
mingu...@hotmail.com
...SNIP...
Not that many kids that do drum corps come out of it with ANY music career.
As an activity, I hope drum corps doesn't judge itself succesful by the
number of kids that gain positions in the metro symphony. Not that the Pete
Bonds of the activity aren't a success story, but I don't believe that this
is the end-all goal of most corpsters. <crossing fingers>
> >> I think
> >>many of them feel that the electronics and amplification issues has been
> >>proven
> >>to work in the band enviroment where they already have access to MANY
> >>additional
> >>textures and seniorities.
>
> >
> >Perhaps, but why lose the uniqueness of drum corps just because something may
> >work for marching band?
>
> Quite simply, (opinion) the ideas are beginning to stagniate. We are seeing
the
> same 25 pieces of music being played time and time again. Corps are scrambling
> to find new material that is difficult, challenging, yet entertaining. You can
> only do so much with brass and percussion within the confines of pre-written
> compositions. I really don't think that the use of a JV-90 synth in the pit
will
> ruin the activity as long as the sounds are generated in real time by a
> performer.
Maybe the extra $100,000 that Roland will sponsor DCI with will cover the
extra judge that will be required to attend the synth player to verify the
validity of his "real-time" notes at every single show.
> If the activity fails to at least consider the prospects of life
with
> electronics, I think they are short changing the kids.\, and the fans. The
> judging community will accept these changes simply becasue the will have too!
I
> have not heard of a judge who openly fears the electronics and amplification
> issues because it will change the essence of the activity. Electronics and
> multiple keyed brass instruments are today, what 3 valve bugles and and the
> "Pit" was yesterday. How much has the drum corps suffered because of the third
> valve, or the addition of a full size marimba instead of a 2 1/2 octave one
that
> is carried? In my opinion the only effects have been positives one if for no
> other reason than the credibility they give "non-corps" people.
While your concept seems comforting, it is over-simplification. Adding
electronics to the realm of G bugles and percussion only is of much larger
magnitude than granting an extra valve.
And there wont be such a thing as "non-corps" people becuase there wont be
drum and bugle corps. There will be HS/College MB's and Pay-to-play MB's
(formerly known as drum and bugle corps). And the pay-to-plays wont last
long, becuase the fans wont be there to support them. Sad but true - drum
corps loyalists will go to DCA/seniors (until the bugles become scrap) and
the band kids will have no interest in attending shows no more unique than
their half-time programs.
...more snips
> I just think that the examination of these ideas needs to
> take place.
no doubt. I'm not against consideration of changes.
> When 17 out of 19 corps instructors vote to have amplification in
> the drum corps activity, it sends a pretty strong signal out that the times
> might be changing!
>
The flow of time and change is interwoven. One can't be against change. But
I do speak out when it's changes that will eliminate the Drum and Bugle Corps
activity.
> Good sparing my friend!
>
> Dave
>
Ryan flip Shepherd
LHS Trmbne
hell if i could set all that crap up and tear it down in time any corps member
could do it..there is a way to get it done.. this year with boa we had almost a
100 foot pit train with mikes and cords and sound stuff all the way down it and
we got it all done in time.. there is a way but it takes practice
--------------------------------------------------------
Tom
Lassiter HS c/o 01
Bone,mello,oboe
"No No Bad Dr. Beat Bad Dr. Beat!"
Remove "SPAMTHIS" to email me
Vagabonds
<wuz...@mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
>I thought it was pretty interesting to hear that Fiedler proposed the
>crowd voting rule change. Made me second guess my initial negative
>response....
>
>~Zack
>
Zack
Jeff's name appeared on the proposal becasue he put it togeter
as a member of the DCI Exec board, of which he is a member. I don't
think the proposal came out of the Cavies organization.
Michael Cahill
cd...@vagabonds.org wrote:
First off Dave, thanks for posting. It's nice to see a director here
in these dangerous waters.
> In many of the instructors opinions, the activity has simply ceased to evolve. It has > been in several years since any significant change was made in the activity.
Isn't this the main reason behind calls for "change"? Instructors who
are doing the same thing year after year getting bored. Are the
members bored? Has anyone bothered to ask them? This is after all
their activity first and foremost.
The talk of electronics, Bflats and amps seems like New Coke to me.
Some guys get antsy doing the same old same old - so they change an
old formula claiming the new one will increase market share - and
then have to gut it when it fails. The difference here is DCI and
corps don't have 1/100000th the bank account of Coke, so a mistake
could be fatal.
> I think many of them feel that the electronics and amplification issues has been
> proven to work in the band enviroment where they already have access to MANY
> additional textures and seniorities.
I highly doubt the success MB is currently enjoying has much if
anything to do with electronics or amps.
> It still amazes me that those people who feel the whole activity is
> going to hell, STILL get on here and post. That says quite alot about just how
> dedicated this community really is.
Some folks (myself included) are quite passionate about an activity
that had a huge role in shaping their lives. Hence the problems with
changing it unless said change is truly in the best interest of drum corps.
> I still watch some of the programs over the
> summer in complete disbelief that instructors can get young people to do some of
> the amazing things they can do. I think many people would agree that the kids
> who do marching in drum corps leave with something much bigger than they came
> with.
Most definitely.
> I am rambling now and will stop!
>
> Dave Campbell
> Director
> General Butler Vagabonds
> DCM Board Member
Thanks again Dave.
Regards
Michael Cahill
CRBPCB
>I really can't see the big deal behind this. It has been my experience that it
>doesn't matter what key, or brand, or how many valves the horn has when it
>comes to playing in tune, or blending the sounds together, or even playing
>"loud". The difference is in how well the performers are trained. The quality
>of the instrument can either help or hinder the process of putting together a
>fine brass section.
I have to strongly disagree. Because of the fundamental length and proportional
bell size, the G instruments are much more powerful and robust than their Bb
counterperts; be they $1200 Bachs, $2000 Schilkes, or $XXX(indeed financially
obscene) Monettes. The C trumpet has a narrower, more penetrating sound than a
Bb, and the D, Eb, and G, A, and Bb piccolos are progressively more so. The G
bugle (alto trumpet, actually)--a minor third lower than the Bb--is markedly
different, especially out doors, where there is no acoustic reinforcement. The
G instruments are the ONLY REMAINING element unique to drum corps. You can tell
it's a corps BY THE SOUND. It's an easy thing to test. I've done it, and those
posting can do so too.
>My reason for wanting it to pass is to have access to better quality
>instruments.
A big part of competitive drum corps is the fact that all the units, from the
Blue Devils, to the Cheeseville Curds, compete with the same equipment, thus
(theoretically) making the activity about the achievement of the members,
rather than the groups' financial resources. Opening the activity to multi-key
brass will quickly reduce the shrinking market for G instruments (as well as
their very existence), and increase the gulf between the haves and have-nots;
say, the Curds playing Bundys and BD on Calicchios or (almost certainly) top
line Yamahas.
>At this point in time, the only instrument that has a real
>advantage for our activity is the trumpet, as most Bb marching brass does not
>play any better (and sometimes worse) than bugles. Consider this, however,
I'll
>bet that if instrument manufacturers would be able to develop instruments for
>drumcorps that they could also sell to marching bands, they would all compete
>to produce a great product, and use drumcorps staff people for input on how to
>improve those products, and to get the top hornlines to endorse their product
>(maybe even sponsorships, imagine that), perhaps we would see a DRASTIC
>improvement in what is available not only for drumcorps, but bands as well.
I suspect corporate money is behind the whole multi-key "push". Perhaps a
company like Yamaha, who is aggressively moving into the American band market.
What if your band could play the very same instruments as the CADETS!!. The
BLUE DEVILS!! That would guarantee tremendous sales (as it has in percussion).
I would wager it's about somebody making money, not the growth or accessability
of the activity.
>Now as for trumpets, a well made soprano doesn't even come close to the
quality
>of even a medium grade trumpet.
And outdoors, a professional trumpet sounds like a kazoo next to a G "bugle".
It's "apples and oranges"; the G bugle is more suited to delivering the
acoustic "punch" and thrilling sound that corps fans (and bandos) love. In the
concert hall (where Star of Indiana has retreated) the G bugle sounds grotesque
and plays like a pig. Your argument is not unlike comparing the merits of a
sewing machine and a roto-tiller; one is finer and of higher quality, but you
wouldn't use it to do the job of the other. After all, it's a somewhat crude
activity; hot sun, rain, sweaty kids, dirt, trucks, busses, crazy visuals,
making loud sounds in football stadiums. Not the stuff of tuxedos and delicate
shading and nuance. ITS DRUM CORPS.
>Why? marketability. A company that makes what I
>consider to be the best soprano also makes custom built trumpets. Why do their
>sopranos cost $450, and their trumpets cost $1500? Think about it a minute.
>Yes, they could easily make a soprano of the same quality, but how many people
>would be willing to pay $1500 for a soprano bugle, when you can buy a Bach
>Stradivarius trumpet for $900? As an aside, one group that I know of did have
>custom built 3 valve G bugles made for them, that are of superior quality, and
>play as well as a custom built trumpet, but those were $2000. (The corps, BTW,
>was FutureCorps)
See above.
>Proposal 3: To allow the use of amplification. Submitted by George Hopkins.
>
>>Should this pass---Emphatic no! George thinks pits can't be heard. Or
>>solos.
>>They can quite well. Pits have been known to overplay the brass at
>>times---will that be solved if their amplified? Only with a good soundman.
>>What about when it rains and the amps have to be shut off and covered?
>>The
>>soloist will actually have to play like he has a set, just like they always
>>have.
>
>Will this pass: No, but it will be close.
>I hope this one passes as well. The issue here is not audibility, but the
>quality of what you hear. I'm sure a lot of drumcorps audiences are not aware
>of the wonderful colors of sound, and expressive qualities of a marimba or
>vibraphone, simply because you have to beat the starch out of it for it to be
>heard outdoors more than 10 yards away. These are great sounds that aren't
>available because of how hard they have to be played, and the types of mallets
>used on them to get them to project. The bigger issue is that the playing
>techniques used to get the amount of sound out of these instruments are
nothing
>short of child abuse.
Child abuse. Right.
Manufacturers build keyboards specifically for outdoor use (where sun and rain
are the primary destroyers). They are designed to take the "abuse" the activity
requires. This is what most corps use. The subtle tonal colors are for indoors.
This is also part of the arrangers' challenge, how to get an effect to the
audience. Some won't just work.
>Amplification would allow instructors to teach their
>students proper playing techniques, and allow audiences to hear these
wonderful
>made waterproof (or covered), and powered by batteries.
If it's sound doesn't carry outside, don't carry it outside (kinda catchy,
huh?). This is why we don't have groups of marching harps, lutes and song
flutes. And talk about haves and have-nots(!); amps, engineers, roadies,
transportation and maintanance. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Sounds like a
perfect way to take something relatively simple and make it complicated and
expensive. Is this being recommended for the same activity whose rising costs
set people to wailing and gnashing teeth?
>IMO, even if these pass, it will still be drumcorps. The activity is more
about
>the experience, and the life lessons learned, and the intense quest for
>perfection than it is about what kind of horn you play.
IMO, it won't be drum corps. It will be something else. And it may still offer
the same experiences, but only for the rich.
Change if you want, but learn the real reasons, and what the consequences could
be.
Peter Bond
Michael Cahill
cd...@vagabonds.org wrote:
> Most of the members I have spoken with (from a few corps....not all) have told
> me they think DCI is way behind in the implemetation of these changes.
I'd still like to hear from all the members.
> To the kids, the electronics revolution has arrived. I can take a 10 year old kid and
> have him playing music on an electronic keyboard in 15 minutes.
Which is why an activity like DC is valuable - you have to work to
produce good quality of sound as opposed to pushing a button for it.
While playing synthesizers may require manual dexterity depending on
the part, they don't require skill at producing the sound.
> They see and hear electronic music in just about everything they see (except drum > corps of course).
All the more reason to keep corps free of electronics. In this
overhyped overmarketed blendo age, homogenization is not the answer.
BTW, MTV is still running it's "Unplugged" series, popular groups
using acoustic instruments, and it does quite well.
> Some of them feel the corps activity as dying because it has not
> changed with the times.
Well MB's seem to be doing fine - and they aren't exactly the football
field equivalent of The Chemical Brothers. In fact, most of the
competitive units are doing shows drum corps created.
> I think that the paranoia that runs through people at the thought of this stuff is
> causing more harm and panic than is useful for any aspect of the activity.
Well I can only speak for myself, my feeling is not paranoia, it's
dismay.
> If the fans leave soley because there is a microphone on
> a marimba and the vibe motor is plugged in, or the soloist has a microphone in
> front of him....the activity is doomed and the "fans" are fair weather!
This won't be the sole reason, just the straw that breaks the camel's
back. I personally will still attend contests, but I doubt I'll like
what I hear. I have YET to hear amplification that added to a marching
band's sound - and I've seen many marching bands. The speakers take a
great natural sound and over blow the highs and lows. And the
keyboards just sound cheap in comparison to brass and winds.
> But to hold the notion that the activity should remain "pure" and never try to utilize
> the modern technology avaliable and already proven to work is too me a sure sign
> of the death of the activity as well.
Why?
> The changes are being considered because they have NOT done anything for several
> years, and it shows.
The changes are being considered IMO because staffs are bored.
> There are less corps right now than ever in the history of the
> activity. The reasons for this are vast and cannot all be blamed on the
> activities lack of growth. However, some of these changes might possibly cause a
> new type of kid to become a member. A piano player, or a college trumpet major
> who thinks the bugle will harm his chops.
So five or six new members at best per corps are going to turn this
whole thing around? Sorry Dave, that doesn't compute.
> Sponserships from Roland and Yahama for brass insruments and synthesizers, Shure > and Peavey for amplification. This means more money to sponser contest with, do
> PR to get more people in, and essentially more cash in the pockets of the drum corps > and the governing body.
But who will get the sponsorships? The big boys, leaving smaller corps
to fend for themselves. I'm all for increased cash flow, but not at
the cost of the acoustic identity of the activity. That's called
selling your soul and it doesn't work in the end.
> Not many kids come out of drum corps and get a full time gig playing snare drum or
> sitting first chair split lead soprano in a symphony. Therefore the case can be made > the the activity does nothing more than promote itself, not it's children.
That's true only if you take the increasingly popular but narrow view
of music education. If you look at the lessons corps teaches members
in how to approach life, you'll find it's already quite educational,
and does an amazing job of promoting it's membership.
I learned a great deal about MUSIC in college as a major. I learned a
great deal more about how to better myself as a person in LIFE from
drum corps.
> Quite simply, (opinion) the ideas are beginning to stagniate. We are seeing the
> same 25 pieces of music being played time and time again.
That's a bit of an overstatement to say the least. Granted there are
favorites that are repeated. But what exactly is so awful about
playing pieces that work?
The majority of stagnation has come IMO from a symphonic bias towards
programming that developed over the last decade.
> Corps are scrambling to find new material that is difficult, challenging, yet
> entertaining. You can only do so much with brass and percussion within the confines > of pre-written compositions.
That depends on the genre of composition. There used to be a great
deal of Latin Jazz/ Fusion perfect for DC (brass & perc). But thanks
to the symphonic shift this style won't win and has been on the
decline. Swing is huge right now but very few corps play it.
Kudos BTW to BD for their program choice this year.
> I really don't think that the use of a JV-90 synth in the pit will
> ruin the activity as long as the sounds are generated in real time by a
> performer.
Depends on the sound. I've heard some great marching bands cheesed up
with poor synth sounds. One of the beautiful things about this idiom
IS it's acoustic nature. That purity is valuable and desirable.
> If the activity fails to at least consider the prospects of life with
> electronics, I think they are short changing the kids.\, and the fans.
I fail to see the logic here. Who are we short changing? The synth
players who really want to be in corps? Fans of electronica? Please elaborate.
> Electronics and multiple keyed brass instruments are today, what 3 valve bugles
> and and the "Pit" was yesterday.
No, they quite simply aren't even remotely the same. Those changes
were modifications to the existing acoustic instrumentation of drum
corps, not the ADDITION of electronic instruments.
> The case could be made that new instruments would cause growth because of
> differnt types of kids needed to play them.
How many keyboards and bassists are we talking about here? 5? They
don't move, so they don't help the visual caption which dictates how
many march where. Sorry Dave, I don't see the huge influx in
membership you do.
> What I do think is a shame, however, is that so many people have bashed Hopkins on > this newsgroup that he no longer posts to it.
> I am interested in his views on this esp. since he vreated the proposals.
Well he was here for quite awhile, but never got around to posting his
rationale behind the proposals. That's part of the reason some people
were harsh with him. Personally I wish he'd have stayed and discussed
it, but I understand his reticence.
> I do agree with you that DCI is having an identity crisis of sorts. I think that
> is a major part of why these proposals have made it this far. Do we keep the
> staus quo?
Change is, IMO, a large factor behind the loss of attendance. More
changes aren't going to solve the problems. If it is allowed to
continue it will be tweaked to death.
> We had the smallest turnout in Orlando in
> many years because of what? location? lack of entertainment? no tics?
All three.
> If any of these proposals pass I am sure we will see a change in the box office.
> Whether that is good or bad is not for me to answer.
An educated guess tells me adding electronics and amps aren't going to
have people knocking down the door. If you change to Bflats, it's like
a complete transfusion. You have to hope the new stuff works before
the patient dies.
> >Maybe these things will come to pass sometime in the long range future. Like I
> >said, if those three proposals are approved, many many thousands are gone as
> >fans and financial supporters. I can see it now though, Marilyn Manson doing
> >promos for the Cadets of Bergen County because they use the same guitars
> >his/her group does! Wouldn't that be a pretty picture!
> >
> Then it appears to me that these people are supporting vicarious living through
> the youth in the activity and are not there for entertainment.
The instrumentation is PART of the entertainment factor. If you change
it, you WILL alienate part of your fan base. Particularly in this
idiom. Sorry, that's just the truth.
> I remember how many people stopped going to NFL games when they were using the > instant reply rule........oh...now I remember....NO ONE
They changed officiating - not the way the game is played or the ball
it was played with. Bad analogy.
> I just think that the examination of these ideas needs to take place.
RAMD is a good place for that, no? Anyone with a computer (good or
bad) can voice their opinion. While it can get petty at times, it
beats a meeting room in a hotel.
> When 17 out of 19 corps instructors vote to have amplification in
> the drum corps activity, it sends a pretty strong signal out that the times
> might be changing!
But it doesn't mean those 17 are doing what's best for the activity.
> Good sparing my friend!
Hope you guys don't mind that I've jumped in.
Thanks again Dave.
> Dave
Michael Cahill
Michael Cahill
DTaylor91 wrote:
> No rule changes have brought in new fans or new members, you're right. The only
> thing that will bring more fans is the quality of the product,
But the problem is defining the "quality" of the product. I edit
film/video for a living and am known as a perfectionist. But I go to
people's houses and thanks to broadcast standards in the US their sets
are purple, green, red etc. The moral? What I consider quality is not
what the average viewer considers quality, and is often of no
consequence to them.
DC can attempt to educate people on quality, but if it wants to be
viable financially it has to ENTERTAIN, and it has to entertain a
majority.
> and the only thing that will bring more members is improving the quality of their
> experience.
Don, many people marched DC with instruments that would be considered
vastly inferior when compared to what's available today. Are you
saying their experience was sorely lacking in quality?
> I think that these two proposals can do just that. You obviously
> don't, and that's OK.
Can most fans tell which corps (singular) uses rosewood marimbas? Will
they be able to tell with amplification? Do those rosewoods actually
sound better without amps?
I guarantee most will notice a difference between Bflat horns and G instruments.
I just don't see where these changes will bring in more fans.
> The distinction would be clear: One would have woodwinds, one would not.
Then what will we call drum and bugle corps?
Like it or not, the brass instruments used in DC ARE a defining key
to the identity.
> I have to put this thought out: To someone not familiar with either activity,
> they appear to be no different already.
Who hasn't seen a marching band? We should change instrumentation
because people who have never seen DC can't tell the difference?
Bringing a DC virgin to their first corps show is EDUCATING them in
the difference. If this activity had been marketed remotely well,
there wouldn't be all that much need for the lesson in the first place.
> (Yes, this is in a way, a bad thing. It has to do with a level of precision and
> excellence problem, and a quality problem IMO, but that's another debate).
It's really a problem of exposure. Quite simply, drum corps is
relatively unknown by the majority of people in this country.
My personal opinion is we need to effectively market what we have
before we throw the towel in and start adding electronics or Bflat
instruments in hopes of increasing revenue and attendance.
> Understand, I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm simply trying to better
> clarify my position, in case anyone's actually reading this. :^)
I think this is being rather well read.
> Don Taylor
Michael Cahill
Michael Cahill
Ron Allard wrote:
> I know I'm an old fart, but this seems to be trying to cure the
> symptom instead of the disease...
It seems that way because it is.
> If the marimba and vibraphone can't be heard properly without
> amplification, then simply don't use them...
They can be heard, with the right technique.
> I'm not totally convinced that "drum corps fans" *want* "to hear these
> wonderful instruments" all that much...
Well, I do. I think they've gotten a bit out of hand at times, but I
still want to hear them. Not as much as the battery, but then I'm a
Neanderthal snare drummer.
> --
> Ron in Vegas
> mailto:ron.a...@att.net
> mailto:Dic...@att.net
>
> "Because there was always something about the Skyliners...
> and that music..."
> - Donnie Solinger
>
> Corpsreps.com - The Drum Corps Repertoire Database
> http://www.corpsreps.com
Michael Cahill
mik...@my-dejanews.com
mca...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> >>
> > > Should this pass--YES! It's about time for this. The fans have been
largely
> > > ignored in the show design for most of the 1990's
> >
> > and 80's and 70's and 60's and...
>
> Actually the fans weren't ignored in those years. Shows were created
> using music that was accessible.
>
I see little in the way of Schonberg on the field. It's still accessible;
looking at Highsticker's list of reps for this year it shows a pretty wide
range of reps.
> > >which has led to decreased attendance at many shows.
> >
> > No it hasn't.
>
> Oh, well if you say so, then it must be true. Have any facts that back
> this up?
>
If you'll remember the DC News article from 1971 that was posted here, the
same complaints were made way back then about show design.
My opinion is that the drop in attandance has more to do with the decline in
numbers of corps nationally, resulting in long tours (added expense) and
declining local shows. It's hard to develop a fan base if there are only one
or two shows a year in a given geographic area.
> > >
> > I hope this one passes; it's about time, esp for trumpets. Hopefully, the
> > quality of marching baris and mellos will improve for bands and corps if
they
> > all use the same instruments, so it might be a win-win for band and corps in
> > those areas.
>
> Bands get better instruments, corps lose their uniqueness - Win/Lose.
>
Win-win. Everyone gets to play on better instruments.
> > I'm not a big fan of electronic instruments in band, but I don't think they
> > should be prohibited, so to be consistent I think they should be allowed in
DC
> > as well.
>
> Consistent with what? Any reason corps should adhere to what bands use
> as instrumentation? Last I checked they weren't competing against one
> another on the field.
>
Consistent in that I don't like a lot of rules against this or that for
artificial reasons. I'd prefer to give the show designers as much latitiude as
possible.
Mike
mik...@my-dejanews.com
frank...@aol.com (FrankAreMe) wrote:
> >Until they have to buy instruments and can't find G horns anymore.
> >
> >Mike
>
> And then the bands will have won because there will be no more drum corps.
> Only those who can maintain the instruments to make them last will survive,
and
> they will eventually die out when their replacements coming from the future
> inbred thing that was once drum corps take over DCA and the alums.
>
They would have to buy the Bb instruments, that's all.
mik...@my-dejanews.com
frank...@aol.com (FrankAreMe) wrote:
>
> There will be defections, both from members and fans if 2 through 4 are
> approved. The only new people you'll get are the one's who are completely
> clueless as to what drum corps was all about and the traditions and history.
>
I hardly think people are going to leave DC just because they mike the
marimbas, or add electronic keyboards. I don't see for adding Bb instruments
either. That seems to be an overstatement, Frank. You just MIGHT get a few
more players who, if they could play on a 'legit' horn, would join a DC, when
they wouldn't if they had to play a bugle. But...I doubt that very many would
join for that reason either.
Seeing two great brass people (Don Taylor and Pete Bond) on different sides of
the issue regarding Bb instruments makes for a very interesting discussion.
>
> These proposals make me think there is some sort of identity crisis in drum
> corps. A few see BOA and see huge bands with guitars, synthesizers and
> whatever else one can plug in and think--That's it! If we had that we would
be
> massive!
Relatively few bands use amplification; far fewer than you might think. Some
use LOTS of it, and some just a little, but most don't use it at all, and
still do well.
> So to them, the only answer is to make us more like bands! Once
> electronics, amplification, multi-keyed brass are legal, drum corps will be
> nothing more than a brass band. It won't be drum corps, it won't be band.
Nothing says you HAVE to use electronics. If the show design, such as a jazz
show, a la BD, calls for an amplified rhythmn section, then they should be
able to go for it, IMHO.
>
> Other questions--if there is going to be amplification that automatically
> assumes two things---a sound technician (will this be a staff member or corps
> member since it's use during a show would detirmine how well a show
> does---staff members can't do that now) and sound checks. Will extra time be
> allocated for that? Sure they can test everything outside of the
> stadium---just another distraction to the fans inside that isn't penalized now
> but should be--but once they are inside you have a whole different accoustical
> environment. Do they redo the sound check?
>
It works just fine in MB now; bands still have the same limited amount of time
to set up, and they have to make it work. Those that don't (and it happens)
suffer in the adjudication process if they are out-of-whack, balance-wise.
> Maybe these things will come to pass sometime in the long range future. Like I
> said, if those three proposals are approved, many many thousands are gone as
> fans and financial supporters.
Just as I don't see hordes running TO join, I don't see hordes fleeing either.
mik...@my-dejanews.com
mca...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> Don, many people marched DC with instruments that would be considered
> vastly inferior when compared to what's available today. Are you
> saying their experience was sorely lacking in quality?
>
There is always room for improvement. Hopefully the experience is constantly
being upgraded. It doesn't mean that the past was sorely lacking, it just
means that if there is a way to make improvements, then those improvements
should be considered.
>
> I guarantee most will notice a difference between Bflat horns and G
instruments.
>
True, esp with corps using both at the same show. As more switch, the new
sound will become THE sound. Just as all of the other improvments over the
years have changed the sound of a DC.
> I just don't see where these changes will bring in more fans.
>
I don't either, but I don't see it losing any as well. If the corps can get
less expensive and better quality instruments, or make it easier to balance
the sound of the pit, or.... I don't see the problem.
>
> Who hasn't seen a marching band? We should change instrumentation
> because people who have never seen DC can't tell the difference?
>
No. But, as to most there IS no difference, whay NOT get the benefits of
'mainstream' instrumentation?
There are plusses and minuses to BOTH sides on this issue. Seeing two great
brass people in Don Taylor and Peter Bond on opposite sides demonstrates THAT
point.
DTaylor91
>But the problem is defining the "quality" of the product. I edit
>film/video for a living and am known as a perfectionist. But I go to
>people's houses and thanks to broadcast standards in the US their sets
>are purple, green, red etc. The moral? What I consider quality is not
>what the average viewer considers quality, and is often of no
>consequence to them.
>
Just curious, did you attempt, or did you want, to adjust their color balance,
so that they could see what the picture should really look like?
If you did, or wanted to, maybe you can see what I'm after.
>DC can attempt to educate people on quality, but if it wants to be
>viable financially it has to ENTERTAIN, and it has to entertain a
>majority.
>
Ah yes, I agree, but wasn't what you used to enjoy about drumcorps was the
precision and perfection that was displayed? (which is lacking somewhat now,
IMO). The point is that entertainment and quality need not be mutually
exclusive (the Canadian Brass comes to mind).
>> and the only thing that will bring more members is improving the quality
>of their
>> experience.
>
>Don, many people marched DC with instruments that would be considered
>vastly inferior when compared to what's available today. Are you
>saying their experience was sorely lacking in quality?
>
No, I wouldn't (please don't try to put words into my mouth). All I'm saying is
that what we're offering kids now could be improved.
>> I think that these two proposals can do just that. You obviously
>> don't, and that's OK.
>
>Can most fans tell which corps (singular) uses rosewood marimbas? Will
>they be able to tell with amplification? Do those rosewoods actually
>sound better without amps?
>
Indoors, Rosewood has a superior sound quality, especially on a marimba.
Placing I mic on one outdoors would allow more of that natural sound to be
heard, because it would not have to be overplayed.
> I guarantee most will notice a difference between Bflat horns and G
instruments.
>
This is exactly why I want it to pass!! :^)
It would sound better!
>I just don't see where these changes will bring in more fans.
>
>> The distinction would be clear: One would have woodwinds, one would not.
>
>
>Then what will we call drum and bugle corps?
>
> Like it or not, the brass instruments used in DC ARE a defining key
>to the identity.
>
I disagree. It is more tied to what we learn about life, how to work for a
common goal, etc. (the experience).
>> I have to put this thought out: To someone not familiar with either
activity,
>> they appear to be no different already.
>
>Who hasn't seen a marching band? We should change instrumentation
>because people who have never seen DC can't tell the difference?
>
No, that's not what I said. Better instruments would differentiate the amount
of time and effort our kids put into their performances, IMO.
>Bringing a DC virgin to their first corps show is EDUCATING them in
>the difference. If this activity had been marketed remotely well,
>there wouldn't be all that much need for the lesson in the first place.
Agreed. Needs to happen more often.
Don Taylor
RBrown4431
>amplification. The smaller corps with less money will have to pay for
>everything. This is already the case for pit equipment.
I doubt this is true. The groups that will get freebies are the Yamaha based
groups. Don't look for Peavy or Marshall to give away speakers and
amps...theres no benefit to it. Bands have been doing their gear for years, and
there is no market penetration to be derived from comping some drum corps...an
activity who its participants freely admit is dwindling.
You want drum corps back in the hands of the performers...ban giveaways. That
will level the playing field overnight.
Rick Brown
RBrown4431
>Championships
>> to listen 90% of the time and talk only 10% of the time on their tapes.
>> Submitted by James Messina.
>>
>> Should this pass--Yes.
Are you insane?????? You want judges not to have to justify their impression
verbally, just listen and write down the #? Throw out the tape and just give us
the sheet. Done deal.
BassClef69
in........
Michael Cahill
DTaylor91 wrote:
>
> Michael writes:
>
> >But the problem is defining the "quality" of the product. I edit
> >film/video for a living and am known as a perfectionist. But I go to
> >people's houses and thanks to broadcast standards in the US their sets
> >are purple, green, red etc. The moral? What I consider quality is not
> >what the average viewer considers quality, and is often of no
> >consequence to them.
> >
> Just curious, did you attempt, or did you want, to adjust their color balance,
> so that they could see what the picture should really look like?
> If you did, or wanted to, maybe you can see what I'm after.
Oh, I did want to, and in some cases adjusted it. I can totally
identify with your position on this. The interesting thing is when I
did adjust it few noticed the difference, and those that did weren't
all that impressed with it.
> >DC can attempt to educate people on quality, but if it wants to be
> >viable financially it has to ENTERTAIN, and it has to entertain a
> >majority.
> >
>
> Ah yes, I agree, but wasn't what you used to enjoy about drumcorps was the
> precision and perfection that was displayed? (which is lacking somewhat now,
> IMO).
We agree again. I do miss those things among others.
> The point is that entertainment and quality need not be mutually
> exclusive (the Canadian Brass comes to mind).
They aren't' mutually exclusive. The issue here is WHAT is considered
quality, and how to implement it in this idiom. Canadian Brass has 5
members, we have 128. Different situations.
> >> and the only thing that will bring more members is improving the quality of their
> >> experience.
> >
> >Don, many people marched DC with instruments that would be considered
> >vastly inferior when compared to what's available today. Are you
> >saying their experience was sorely lacking in quality?
> >
>
> No, I wouldn't (please don't try to put words into my mouth).
I'm not. That's why I asked for clarification.
> All I'm saying is that what we're offering kids now could be improved.
I appreciate that. My point is that the experience is quite amazing
even with the instruments at hand. Granted duct taping horns is no picnic.
> >Can most fans tell which corps (singular) uses rosewood marimbas? Will
> >they be able to tell with amplification? Do those rosewoods actually
> >sound better without amps?
> >
> Indoors, Rosewood has a superior sound quality, especially on a marimba.
> Placing I mic on one outdoors would allow more of that natural sound to be
> heard, because it would not have to be overplayed.
Technically it wouldn't be the "natural sound". It would be
electronically amplified.
My question still stands - who's really going to notice the difference?
> > I guarantee most will notice a difference between Bflat horns and G
> > instruments.
> >
>
> This is exactly why I want it to pass!! :^) It would sound better!
To each his own. Bflats don't kick like G's, so it's G's for me.
> >Then what will we call drum and bugle corps?
> >
> > Like it or not, the brass instruments used in DC ARE a defining key
> >to the identity.
> >
> I disagree. It is more tied to what we learn about life, how to work for a
> common goal, etc. (the experience).
I've heard this opinion floated before. Can't see how instruments can
be so little of the equation in an idiom that cherishes it's uniqueness.
> >> I have to put this thought out: To someone not familiar with either activity,
> >> they appear to be no different already.
> >
> >Who hasn't seen a marching band? We should change instrumentation
> >because people who have never seen DC can't tell the difference?
> >
> No, that's not what I said. Better instruments would differentiate the amount
> of time and effort our kids put into their performances, IMO.
Sorry, I still don't get the gist. How will "better" instruments
accomplish this?
Thanks for the discussion Don.
> Don Taylor
Michael Cahill
mik...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> > > > The fans have been largely
> > > > ignored in the show design for most of the 1990's
> > >
> > > and 80's and 70's and 60's and...
> >
> > Actually the fans weren't ignored in those years. Shows were created
> > using music that was accessible.
> >
> I see little in the way of Schonberg on the field.
Well my educated guess is most people don't have to go as far as
Schoenberg to get turned off. You're talking about the "Outer Limits"
of accessibility.
> It's still accessible;
Much more so to music majors than the average person.
> looking at Highsticker's list of reps for this year it shows a
> pretty wide range of reps.
The beginning of what I hope is a much needed swing back to a
reasonable middle ground.
> If you'll remember the DC News article from 1971 that was posted here, the
> same complaints were made way back then about show design.
And DCI was formed in 72 to pursue those new show ideas. That change
worked, but simply because it did is not reason to believe this one
will as well.
> My opinion is that the drop in attandance has more to do with the decline in
> numbers of corps nationally, resulting in long tours (added expense) and
> declining local shows. It's hard to develop a fan base if there are only one
> or two shows a year in a given geographic area.
I agree that these are factors. But to entirely dismiss programming as
a reason for decline in attendance is simply ignorant of the
situation. How many people have to say they aren't enjoying the new
repertoires in terms of accessibility before it's considered as a
reason we've lost fans?
> > Bands get better instruments, corps lose their uniqueness - Win/Lose.
> >
> Win-win. Everyone gets to play on better instruments.
Again, better is relative to perspective. G instruments are much
better for outdoor use, and I just plain like their sound better than
Bflats. Read Peter Bond's brilliant post on the topic.
It's actually win- . . . . . there is no difference so corps loose
their unique sound and merge into homogenization with bands. If drum
corps is to survive it has to push it's uniqueness.
> > > I'm not a big fan of electronic instruments in band, but I don't think they
> > > should be prohibited, so to be consistent I think they should be allowed in DC
> > > as well.
> >
> > Consistent with what? Any reason corps should adhere to what bands use
> > as instrumentation? Last I checked they weren't competing against one
> > another on the field.
> >
> Consistent in that I don't like a lot of rules against this or that for
> artificial reasons.
Electronics ARE artificial. That's quite a paradox eh?
Sorry Mike, I don't see where consistency can even be drawn between
two separate entities (DCI/BOA) or two separate activities.
The reasons behind using G instruments are far from "artificial".
Again I refer you to Peter Bond's post. The rules prohibiting
electronics are just as valid.
This activity is acoustic, that's part of it's draw. If we add these
proposals drum corps takes a huge step into the Wal-Mart of the
marching "industry".
> I'd prefer to give the show designers as much latitiude as possible.
Show designers have had WAY too much latitude in the last decade IMO.
The contest is supposed to be decided by the members and their
abilities, not the adults and their designs.
Some designers have done all right with the freedom, others have not.
Michael Cesario actually blamed the members (amateurs) for shows that
didn't work (DCI Today). That statement is indicative of a design
mindset with far too much liberty.
Michael Cahill
RBrown4431 wrote:
> >The top 12 corps will most likely get free gear - sponsorships - for
> >amplification. The smaller corps with less money will have to pay for
> >everything. This is already the case for pit equipment.
>
> I doubt this is true.
It's true in percussion.
> The groups that will get freebies are the Yamaha based groups.
Not all the Yamaha groups will get freebies. The top x will, and the
rest will have to shell out cash. Yamaha doesn't give sponsorships to
every corps that uses their gear.
> Don't look for Peavy or Marshall to give away speakers and
> amps...theres no benefit to it.
If Cadets or BD end up using Peavy/Marshall those companies stand to
make cash on the MB side just as drum companies do.
> Bands have been doing their gear for years, and
> there is no market penetration to be derived from comping some drum corps...an
> activity who its participants freely admit is dwindling.
It's called brand marketing. "Peavy is the amp of choice of the (fill
in the blank)".
Penetration or not, they'll use it.
Declining or not, the choice of the top corps is often influential in
the choice of bands.
> You want drum corps back in the hands of the performers...ban giveaways. That
> will level the playing field overnight.
Not really. The larger corps will still be able to afford better newer
gear than the others. If you really want a level field - everyone gets
comp gear. But we both know that will never happen.
> Rick Brown
Michael Cahill
mik...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> I hardly think people are going to leave DC just because they mike the
> marimbas, or add electronic keyboards. I don't see for adding Bb instruments
> either. That seems to be an overstatement, Frank.
I'd have to disagree. Corps people are renowned for their preference
of instrumentation. We've even been called elitist because of it. That
doesn't just go away if Bflats/electronics/ are introduced.
> Nothing says you HAVE to use electronics. If the show design, such as a jazz
> show, a la BD, calls for an amplified rhythmn section, then they should be
> able to go for it, IMHO.
Wait until critique. If these go through I guarantee corps will lobby
for higher scores due to the electronics/brass they use. They did/do
it with marching - we march faster, that's harder, we deserve the
higher score - they'll do it with electronics.
> Just as I don't see hordes running TO join, I don't see hordes fleeing either.
Two different groups - members joining, fans leaving. Different
reasons for both - ultimately not comparable.
> Mike
Michael
FrankAreMe
>either.
>
>
>
I just don't want to see hordes of anything coming or going!
Ok, I have talked to a few people to gain a better understanding of this and I
am a little clearer on the thinking behind some of the proposals.
One thing--one person said it would be a staff member running the soundboard,
others have said it would be one of the marching members--which brings me to
this:
As things are now, staff members cannot (play something etc--can they still
direct like they could direct concert in the old days?)aide during the actual
performance of a show. Wouldn't the staff member running a soundboard then
have an actual affect on the performance which is subject to judging?
Side note, I'm really glad to see this debate being so civil. Many of us have
very strong opinions on the electronics and any-key issues and so far we've all
conducted ourselves quite well when you compare it to recent RAMD history!
One thing I want to know, in the Editorial in Drum Corps World by Steve Powers,
he printed the results of the vote on each of these proposals as given to him
by DCI. However, it doesn't say just who these 19 or 20 voters were. I
thought it was directors but apparently it wasn't. Any insight from those who
were there?
I still have problems with any key instruments and electronics. Maybe if we
could get a horn line together--a top 12 hornline--and play the same music on
a set of G bugles and then on marching band instruments, the debate would be
over as to what is better for the outside. I still say, judging from the Star
of Indiana/Canadian Brass cd that the G's would win.
Frank
Jeff Mitchell
FrankAreMe wrote:
> One thing--one person said it would be a staff member running the soundboard,
> others have said it would be one of the marching members--which brings me to
> this:
>
> As things are now, staff members cannot (play something etc--can they still
> direct like they could direct concert in the old days?)aide during the actual
> performance of a show. Wouldn't the staff member running a soundboard then
> have an actual affect on the performance which is subject to judging?
>
Part of the problem with the proposals was they didn't do their homework. This
change didn't designate who would run the board. Part of the issue for the BOD is
to flesh out the rules, if implemented for 1999. You might see it "passed" for
2000, with issues to be resolved later.
> Side note, I'm really glad to see this debate being so civil. Many of us have
> very strong opinions on the electronics and any-key issues and so far we've all
> conducted ourselves quite well when you compare it to recent RAMD history!
> One thing I want to know, in the Editorial in Drum Corps World by Steve Powers,
> he printed the results of the vote on each of these proposals as given to him
> by DCI. However, it doesn't say just who these 19 or 20 voters were. I
> thought it was directors but apparently it wasn't. Any insight from those who
> were there?
>
Each corps present at the rules congress had one vote on each proposal Sunday
morning after a weekend of discussion. The Congress was "designed" (chuckle,
chuckle) for the corps staff and one staff person was selected to vote. Usually it
was the Program Coordinator or most senior instructor. This was a weekend for staff
and judges. There were a few directors present.
The vote was only a recommendation to the directors, who will really vote in San
Antonio this weekend. In the past this was all done on one weekend. However, corps
staff didn't have time to convey the debate, both pro and con, to the corps
managers. Often, the final vote was made without enough information exchanged.
> I still have problems with any key instruments and electronics. Maybe if we
> could get a horn line together--a top 12 hornline--and play the same music on
> a set of G bugles and then on marching band instruments, the debate would be
> over as to what is better for the outside. I still say, judging from the Star
> of Indiana/Canadian Brass cd that the G's would win.
The debate would not be over, IMHO. It would probably just add to the chorus,
either amplified or acoustic.
Jeff
Jeff Mitchell
CRBPCB wrote:
> I will weigh in by responding to a post by Don Taylor. He writes:
> >I really can't see the big deal behind this. It has been my experience that it
> >doesn't matter what key, or brand, or how many valves the horn has when it
> >comes to playing in tune, or blending the sounds together, or even playing
> >"loud". The difference is in how well the performers are trained. The quality
> >of the instrument can either help or hinder the process of putting together a
> >fine brass section.
>
> I have to strongly disagree. Because of the fundamental length and proportional
> bell size, the G instruments are much more powerful and robust than their Bb
> counterperts; be they $1200 Bachs, $2000 Schilkes, or $XXX(indeed financially
> obscene) Monettes. The C trumpet has a narrower, more penetrating sound than a
> Bb, and the D, Eb, and G, A, and Bb piccolos are progressively more so. The G
> bugle (alto trumpet, actually)--a minor third lower than the Bb--is markedly
> different, especially out doors, where there is no acoustic reinforcement. The
> G instruments are the ONLY REMAINING element unique to drum corps. You can tell
> it's a corps BY THE SOUND. It's an easy thing to test. I've done it, and those
> posting can do so too.
>
Peter,
Great to hear from you. The G bugle has been designed for outdoor performance.
Couldn't a Bb trumpet be designed for similar use? Many lead players employ a .468
or.470 bore to increase power and volume. My .470 Selmer Claude Gordon model can
crank well beyond my .459 Bach Model 72*. I'd match it against the DEG or Kanstul
soprano.
The question of G vs. Bb in regards to trumpets/soprano is only part of the
equation. What is your take on the alto voice mellophone moving down from G to F?
It would seem to add to the power of that sound via your trumpet analogy. The
standard concert keys for the middle voice have been F and Eb, so perhaps it might
be a positive here.
As far as baritone and contrabasses moving up a minor third to Bb. It might help
the audiblilty of the contra choirs as they have a hard time speaking from the
field. Perhaps some low brass players could weigh in their opinions.
The move to multi-key certainly tugs at my heart strings after 34 years of playing,
teaching, and judging G instruments. Perhaps the attachment to G for us oldtimers
is more psychological and emotional than real differences in sound. By that I mean
the key of the instrument has a far deeper meaning for many of us.
Jeff
BassClef69
I am currently a Contra player for the Cadets of Bergen County. As a fan
on Drum Corps, I don't see that the change is neccasary at this point in time.
On the other hand, I don't think it makes that much of a difference....sound
wise at least. Hell, it would make the instruments lighter.
CRBPCB
In a message dated 1/26/99 4:33:07 PM, JEFFMI...@prodigy.net writes:
>
Peter,
Great to hear from you. The G bugle has been designed for outdoor performance.
Couldn't a Bb trumpet be designed for similar use? Many lead players employ a
.468
or.470 bore to increase power and volume. My .470 Selmer Claude Gordon model
can
crank well beyond my .459 Bach Model 72*. I'd match it against the DEG or
Kanstul
soprano.
I too have a big comercial trumpet (.470 Callet made by Kig Kanstul), and am of
another opinion, but I think the test has to be done out of doors. In any case,
I think the larger issue is the fact that all competing units now use the same
instruments, giving them (at least in that area) a level playing field, as it
were.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The question of G vs. Bb in regards to trumpets/soprano is only part of the
equation. What is your take on the alto voice mellophone moving down from G to
F?
It would seem to add to the power of that sound via your trumpet analogy. The
standard concert keys for the middle voice have been F and Eb, so perhaps it
might
be a positive here.
Could be. But what are we trying to do here, create a wind ensemble on the
field? And the mello certainly doesn't need to be louder!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
As far as baritone and contrabasses moving up a minor third to Bb. It might
help
the audiblilty of the contra choirs as they have a hard time speaking from the
field. Perhaps some low brass players could weigh in their opinions.
..........................
This is a technique and training issue. I worked with our contra players a bit
last season and was able to get instant response and excellent projection from
them. These problems are a result of misguided instruction. Arnold Jacobs'
concepts taken too far, or out of context. Wind ain't everything.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The move to multi-key certainly tugs at my heart strings after 34 years of
playing,
teaching, and judging G instruments. Perhaps the attachment to G for us
oldtimers
is more psychological and emotional than real differences in sound. By that I
mean
the key of the instrument has a far deeper meaning for many of us.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I am not being sentimental. And I am not suggesting that the G bugles are
wonderful musical instruments. I think some people are forwarding proposals
which will harm the unique nature and beauty of the activity. Part of the
beauty is its simplicity in that it is (still) acoustic. For example, I am so
disappointed seeing Broadway shows these days because they are 100% amplified.
Even if it is perfect, it's boring. Much of the energy is missing. It's bad
enough that a corps' success is largely in the hands of designers (a seperate
issue, of course); amplification and the attendant technology will further
muddy the water, and favor those with money.
I feel that the brass instrumentation is key (pardon pun) to drum corps unique
power & sound. This could of course easily be tested this summer, by having a
corps play a transposed arrangement on both types of instruments, say in an
early-season DCI clinic. But more importantly, in the name of fairness and cost
I oppose the two proposals as harmful. The only winner in the multi key world
would be Yamaha and those top groups appearing in their inevitable advertising
to the huge HS band market.
Pete
----------------------- Headers ------->>
MIKE DUFFY
CRBPCB wrote:
> I have to strongly disagree. Because of the fundamental length and proportional
> bell size, the G instruments are much more powerful and robust than their Bb
> counterpart.
Col. Custer's bugler played a Bb horn:-)
McD
MScout008
>complain about how they never win.
You know what...I'm going to show that I'm a better person than you are, and
not go off on you. I did not once complain about not winning...quite frankly,
I don't care what place we get...that is not why I joined Scouts...and I know
that nobody else that I've talked to in Scouts cares what place we get either.
That's what I was saying in my post. Maybe you should think next time before
you open your pie hole and say something retarded. Get a life man.
Stephen Bond 008
May You Never Walk Alone
Madison Scouts Euphonium 99
-----------------------------------------------------
Carolina Crown 97
Bayou City Blues 98
MScout008
>earlier post, so take it easy. If you read it again, you'll find out he
>was just making a statement.
>
>May You Never Walk Alone,
>Andy Smith
Thanks Andy.
FrankAreMe
>Col. Custer's bugler played a Bb horn:-)
>
>McD
>
>
And look what happened to him!!! :)
James A. Chappell
In a previous article, cd...@vagabonds.org () says:
>
>Quite simply, (opinion) the ideas are beginning to stagniate. We are seeing the
>same 25 pieces of music being played time and time again.
>
If these rules pass, we'll see the same 25 pieces of music being played
time and time again on different instruments.
>
>Corps are scrambling, to find new material that is difficult, challenging,
>yet entertaining. You can only do so much with brass and percussion within
>confines of pre-written compositions.
>
In my opinion, a good arranger can make anything work within the confines
of brass and percussion (provided that the source material is any good
to start out with).
--
James A. Chappell
Saint Louis, MO USA
http://members.primary.net/~chappell
James A. Chappell
In a previous article, mca...@mindspring.com (Michael Cahill) says:
>
>> The changes are being considered because they have NOT done anything for several
>> years, and it shows.
>
>The changes are being considered IMO because staffs are bored.
>
>
If the staffs are getting bored with drum corps, or find the drum corps
medium too limiting, then they should move on to some other activity or
create there own. If they are really as talented as some believe,
they sould have no trouble being successful somewhere else.
I'm sure there are many qualified people who would gladly take
their place.
FrankAreMe
Frankareme writes:
>Don,
>
>While you've been a big help in the past on questions and comments I've
>had, I
>have to say that on these issues, you sound too much like Hopkins.
>
>>Is this supposed to be an insult?
Not at all, just an observation.
>You make the comment that weather isn't an issue--I say B.S. I've seen
>it Don,
>bands withdrawing from shows because it's raining--no lightening mind you,
>Well, All I can tell you is that I have seen it >work, and work well. It CAN
be
>done, and I can put you in otuch with the >people that have learned to make it
>work, if you like.
Well I've seen it not work, and more times than I've seen it kinda work. I've
seen shows cancelled, bands pulling out of shows, guitar players almost zapped,
all because of rain!
>Miked solos--I've soloed for years, never used a crutch. Most corps soloists
>have been the same way on the field, you can hear them over anything. Same
>way
>with the pit--listen to the cd's or records---how many times do you hear
> the
>pit drowning everything out?
>
>Again, from my point of view, it's not a >volume issue, it's a quality of
sound
>and equipment durability issue.
Ahh, so you're saying that myself and other soloists who do have a great sound
while playing full and yes loud really don't have a good sound quality? I'm
sorry but mikes don't hide bad technique or sound quality, they just make it
louder and more noticable.
Don:
> As far as sound checks are concerned,
proper care of equipment, and adequate rehearsals take care of this. Sound
checks aren't allowed in BOA except as part of the normal time alloted to set
up on the field, which happens to be the same as DCI currently allows.
So, marching members and inexperienced staff can set up amps, mikes, boards,
etc without a sound check and have them make the most wonderous sounds the
world has ever heard while the pros spend hours before every gig?.
Impressive!
>Don, it's not about the experience, it's about what drum corps is. I didn't
>have the experience in bands that I've had in drum corps.. That's why
>I'm
>marching drum corps again and not doing band. Because it's not the
>same--instrumentation, identity OR experience.
>
Don:
>Maybe I reading the above incorrectly, but >you seem to contradict yourself,
so
>I'll leave this for now.
No, I'm not...to me drum corps was and still is a much better experience than
what I had in any band I was in. That's why I choose to still march, playing
a G baritone instead of sitting in some band playing the same old stock
arrangements that I've been playing for 25 years.
WRoe424922
Yeah...and look what happened to him!!!!
Jeff Mitchell
MIKE DUFFY wrote:
>
>
> CRBPCB wrote:
>
> > I have to strongly disagree. Because of the fundamental length and proportional
> > bell size, the G instruments are much more powerful and robust than their Bb
> > counterpart.
>
> Col. Custer's bugler played a Bb horn:-)
>
> McD
This might McDuffy's best of all time.
Jeff
William A Roderick
> In article <19990125134818...@ng-fi1.aol.com>,
> frank...@aol.com (FrankAreMe) wrote:
> >
> > There will be defections, both from members and fans if 2 through 4 are
> > approved. The only new people you'll get are the one's who are completely
> > clueless as to what drum corps was all about and the traditions and history.
> >
>
> I hardly think people are going to leave DC just because they mike the
> marimbas, or add electronic keyboards. I don't see for adding Bb instruments
> either. That seems to be an overstatement, Frank. You just MIGHT get a few
> more players who, if they could play on a 'legit' horn, would join a DC, when
> they wouldn't if they had to play a bugle. But...I doubt that very many would
> join for that reason either.
>
> Seeing two great brass people (Don Taylor and Pete Bond) on different sides of
> the issue regarding Bb instruments makes for a very interesting discussion.
>
> >
> > These proposals make me think there is some sort of identity crisis in drum
> > corps. A few see BOA and see huge bands with guitars, synthesizers and
> > whatever else one can plug in and think--That's it! If we had that we would
> be
> > massive!
>
> Relatively few bands use amplification; far fewer than you might think. Some
> use LOTS of it, and some just a little, but most don't use it at all, and
> still do well.
>
> > So to them, the only answer is to make us more like bands! Once
> > electronics, amplification, multi-keyed brass are legal, drum corps will be
> > nothing more than a brass band. It won't be drum corps, it won't be band.
>
> Nothing says you HAVE to use electronics. If the show design, such as a jazz
> show, a la BD, calls for an amplified rhythmn section, then they should be
> able to go for it, IMHO.
>
I mentioned this before, remember back in 74 when rules for entering the field
changed? The corps that "chose"
to enter the starting line were dumped! Why? Because they were told they were
behind the times. Judges are human (I know this may be a shock to some of you) ,
some of those judges will be affected by the fact that a corps chose not to use
electronics. It would be the same as if a top 12 corps chose to stay with valve
rotor when 2 valves were introduced. They wouldn't be top 12 for long (assuming it
was possible to get the same quality of sound with the valve rotor). They just
wouldn't get the score the performance merited.
Bill
> >
> > Other questions--if there is going to be amplification that automatically
> > assumes two things---a sound technician (will this be a staff member or corps
> > member since it's use during a show would detirmine how well a show
> > does---staff members can't do that now) and sound checks. Will extra time be
> > allocated for that? Sure they can test everything outside of the
> > stadium---just another distraction to the fans inside that isn't penalized now
> > but should be--but once they are inside you have a whole different accoustical
> > environment. Do they redo the sound check?
> >
>
> It works just fine in MB now; bands still have the same limited amount of time
> to set up, and they have to make it work. Those that don't (and it happens)
> suffer in the adjudication process if they are out-of-whack, balance-wise.
>
> > Maybe these things will come to pass sometime in the long range future. Like I
> > said, if those three proposals are approved, many many thousands are gone as
> > fans and financial supporters.
>
> Just as I don't see hordes running TO join, I don't see hordes fleeing either.
>
> Mike
>
Zig-A-Du-But
>Championships
>> to listen 90% of the time and talk only 10% of the time on their tapes.
>> Submitted by James Messina.
>>
>
>
>I think that this could be handled internally by the judging community
>without a 'rule' that is basically unenforceable. The goal at champs is to
>focus on the performance of the moment, and not be concerned about
improvment
>suggestions, so I certainly agree that a constant chatter isn't called for.
>Training could handle this in a sufficient manner.
That rule would be STUPID to pass... How are members supposed to get
better, if the Judges aren't allowed to tell them "Okay, Fix this here"...
>
>>
>> Proposal ID#B: Would require the judging panel at DCI finals to see each
>corps
>> at least once at the regionals. Submitted by Raymond Luniewski, director
of
>> Lake Erie Regiment
>>
>
>For division II and III this might be a tough one, as mentioned elsewhere,
but
>it SHOULD be the goal of whoever does the assignments, again without a
'rule'
>that might not be possible to follow.
>
I think that would be a GOOD idea, because judging is so different for div
II/III Corps between shows, scores change drastically, and we get
'incompetent' judges, because we aren't open....
>>
>> Proposal 1: Would add crowd participation to the judging of weekend
shows.
>> The audience would have 10 to 30% of the total scoring. Submitted by
Jeff
>> Fiedler, director of the Cavaliers
>>
>
>I see by someone elses post (was it Jeff's?) that this may be handled by
>selecting people from the stands and giving them some quick training and a
>sheet. I'm not sure that this would work, although it might be nice to try
as
>an experiment, or as a speccial award type of thing.
This should pass, like judge how the croud 'gets into it', like how magic
1997 would get a 10/10 and like, uhh..... Crossmen would too, but a corps
like Magic 1996 would get about a 3/10, because their show wasn't appealing
to many people (to listen to)
>> Proposal 2: Would allow brass, front-bell valve instruments in any key.
>> Submitted by David Gibbs, director of the Blue Devils.
>>
>
>I hope this one passes; it's about time, esp for trumpets. Hopefully, the
>quality of marching baris and mellos will improve for bands and corps if
they
>all use the same instruments, so it might be a win-win for band and corps
in
>those areas.
This should NOT pass... Drumcorps would quickly become BAND.. And the
Hopkins would get his way..> Whats next, Saxomophones?
>
>>
>> Proposal 3: To allow the use of amplification. Submitted by George
Hopkins.
>>
>
>It would be nice to see this pass, but it most likely won't.
Should not pass... This is a drumcorps show... Drum and BUGLE corps show..
You're supposed to LEARN at drumcorps, and you can't learn dynamix if
someone is sitting there flipping around dials to turn you UP and DOWN...
>
>> Proposal 4: Would allow for electronic instruments. Submitted by George
>> Hopkins.
>>
>
>I'm not a big fan of electronic instruments in band, but I don't think they
>should be prohibited, so to be consistent I think they should be allowed in
DC
>as well.
Prohibited.... Never to be used.. My thoughts.... This is drumcorps, not
a Techno show...
>
>>
>> Proposal 5: Would allow unlimited membership in open class corps.
Submitted
>> by George Hopkins.
>>
>
>I wouldn't mind this one passing. If a corps wants to field 250 kids, IMHO
>they should be able to. You might have to put class sizes in competitions,
as
>is done for bands today, if there are many takers on this one.
This would be a good idea, if it would not DESTROY Div II/III corps.... If
Open Class Corps were allowed to get as many kids as they wanted, they'd not
cut people, until it got extreme.. You'd see 500member corps, which would
then again, destroy the less-than top 12 corps, because no-one wants to join
'Bob's Drumcorps', and the only reason they do that, is because they don't
get in Dev's...
Tim
Groupee - Now until Forever!
CII - 1998 - 1999
Ridge Raiders 1995 - 1997
Jeff Wise
>
> In article <19990125134818...@ng-fi1.aol.com>,
> frank...@aol.com (FrankAreMe) wrote:
> >
> > So to them, the only answer is to make us more like bands! Once
> > electronics, amplification, multi-keyed brass are legal, drum corps will be
> > nothing more than a brass band. It won't be drum corps, it won't be band.
>
> Nothing says you HAVE to use electronics. If the show design, such as a jazz
> show, a la BD, calls for an amplified rhythmn section, then they should be
> able to go for it, IMHO.
This is a great line being used by the pro-electronics and even Bb
camp for ages, but you know what, it's not valid when put to the
test of precedence.
Early 90's corps were successful (numbers-wise) and won with
obscure music that pandered to judges and not to the average fan.
What happened?
How many corps followed suit and started playing the game? Many,
too many.
What happens when electronics gets passed and Cadets and/or BD
wins with it?
Every single corps is going to equate using electronics with
better placements.
It's not a supposition, it's history playing itself out again.
Jeff Wise
Diana Marie Cook
First off, let me mention that when I read the initial post listing these
proposals, I thought some of them were somebody's idea of a sick joke.
No offense to anyone who presented them or agrees with them...that was
honestly my reaction.
I know I only marched for 3 years, and that I've only even been aware of
drumcorps' existence for 7 years. I know I'm still young in the grand
scheme of the activity...even though I aged out in 97. But some of these
ideas just seem so foreign to the entire concept of drumcorps as I know
it. Amplification? Electronics? Aren't these the age-old questions
we've been debating on ramd since at least 1994 (the first time I read the
newsgroup)? Haven't we as a group been drastically opposed to these
ideas, for the most part?
On the other hand... I call on the veterans of the 60's and 70's to speak
up here. When we went through valve-rotors, 2-valves, and on to
3-valves, who offered up a similar debate? Did anyone (and I'm seriously
curious here) think it would de-evolve drumcorps to have 3 valves on the
horns?
>OK, let me ask you this-When you're listening to an orchestra, can you tell,
>unless you look closely, if the trumpet section is playing on Bb or C trumpets?
I don't know about the rest of you, but I remember the first time I
joined the high school band. I was in 11th grade, and I'd just learned
to play the clarinet (flame-bait, I know... it wasn't my fault!). I was
used to being in choir, where everyone was in the same key, and now I had
to remember to transpose up a full step from what the director said.
Bb... OK, I play C. Then, I learned saxophone. Oh, God... He says Bb, I
play G. I dig, I guess. Transposition isn't all that difficult, but it
was a pain.
Then, when I was 19, I joined drumcorps. From the college marching band
to division III. The Brass Caption Head stands in front of the arc, says
to play G. You play G. How simple is that? I felt that the unified key
of the brass instruments helped me focus on my progress as a player as
opposed to a theorist. (One who knows music theory...?)
My point? Being in one key makes it easier to focus on the music itself,
IMO. Like I said, it's not that transposition is difficult, but not
having to do it makes things go so much easier.
>>Some corps will change over, others won't be able to afford it.
This bothers me, as well, and I had also considered this. As touchy as
judging is -- and no offense to the judges here, it just is -- can you
imagine what it will be like for the less financially fortunate corps?
Ones who try to fit in and join in on the amplification thing, but end up
getting the Radio Shack special with the clip-on omnidirectional bell-front
mike for the soloist? The one that makes his laser-tone
styrofoam-soprano sound even worse than overblowing? (Not that everyone
sounds like this -- I'm just giving an example here.) Rankings between
close corps rivals will depend on who has the better soundsystem, and the
corps with more money will have the better soundsystem. Personally, I
don't think this idea bodes well for the up-and-coming
financially-strapped corps.
>>I find it hypocritical to push for amplification on the grounds of
>>"musicality" or how the instrument is meant to be heard when it was
>>never MEANT to be on a football field.
If you want to get technical, bugles were MEANT to resound on the
battlefield. How much more open of an area can you get?
Seriously -- I know you're talking about percussion here, for the most
part. I've never had a problem hearing the pit myself. Of course, the
corps I started out with had the largest pit in division III one year...
>>Rain is very much an issue. So is time. So are malfunctions.
May I use our new partner Bands of America as a prime example here? Who
here saw BOA in 1994 when Plymouth Canton (Centennial?) Educational Park
did Jesus Christ Superstar... and their PA gave out? I only saw the
show once, so I don't know how it sounded with the mic on, but there was
a guy up on some scaffolding, singing. And, when their PA went out,
there was nothing. It was disappointing, because I got the impression
that it would have been good, had the PA worked... but as it was, it was
a complete GE failure, for that carefully-planned moment of the show.
Do we want these things to become obstacles in our shows? Props falling
over are bad enough, and forgetting parts of props, and things of that
sort. Now we're introducing more variables, and I personally disagree.
Of course, I'm not a percussionist...
>>If it really isn't about
>>the instruments at all, why is it called DRUM and BUGLE corps?
>
>They haven't been bugles since they added that first valve.
I don't know what I want to add to this part... just thought it poignant
enough to keep it in my quotes. :) Something to ponder.
>>Marching Band - not about the instruments. D&BC - ALL about the instruments.
>
>If it was all about the instruments, then every HS in the nation would be able
>to buy bugles, and totally duplicate our activity.
Here's an interesting point. There *are* High Schools out there who
don't march woodwinds at all. I enjoy listening to them more than normal
HS bands, myself. I, having started out as a woodwind (again, I stress
that it was *not* my fault!), am of the opinion that they should march
nowhere, not even in marching band. But... what are these HS bands who
don't march woodwinds? The stand apart from other bands, but they're
still not corps.
What will corps be when we add non-conical bell-front instruments in
various keys? Not corps... not band... some sort of monster-movie
amalgamation? Just something to ponder.
I hope I made some intelligible points... I think I lost my train of
thought, but that's not abnormal for me. :)
Just say no to electronics!
(Do the Amish believe in marching drumcorps?)
--
Diana Cook <dmc...@BGNet.bgsu.edu>
Resume: http://www.geocities.com/CollegePark/5093
National Institute for the Study of Digital Media:
http://www.bgsu.edu/offices/nisdm/
DTaylor91
>> >But the problem is defining the "quality" of the product. I edit
>> >film/video for a living and am known as a perfectionist. But I go to
>> >people's houses and thanks to broadcast standards in the US their sets
>> >are purple, green, red etc. The moral? What I consider quality is not
>> >what the average viewer considers quality, and is often of no
>> >consequence to them.
>> >
>> Just curious, did you attempt, or did you want, to adjust their color
>balance,
>> so that they could see what the picture should really look like?
>> If you did, or wanted to, maybe you can see what I'm after.
>
>Oh, I did want to, and in some cases adjusted it. I can totally
>identify with your position on this. The interesting thing is when I
>did adjust it few noticed the difference, and those that did weren't
>all that impressed with it.
>
LOL! I can see the same thing happening in my case, too.
<snip>
>> No, I wouldn't (please don't try to put words into my mouth).
>
>I'm not. That's why I asked for clarification.
>
OK, fair enough.
>> All I'm saying is that what we're offering kids now could be improved.
>
>I appreciate that. My point is that the experience is quite amazing
>even with the instruments at hand. Granted duct taping horns is no picnic.
>
Ah, then you saw Magic's horns at close range last summer :^)
>> >Can most fans tell which corps (singular) uses rosewood marimbas? Will
>> >they be able to tell with amplification? Do those rosewoods actually
>> >sound better without amps?
>> >
>> Indoors, Rosewood has a superior sound quality, especially on a marimba.
>> Placing I mic on one outdoors would allow more of that natural sound to
>be
>> heard, because it would not have to be overplayed.
>
>Technically it wouldn't be the "natural sound". It would be
>electronically amplified.
>My question still stands - who's really going to notice the difference?
>
I guess those of us that are bothered my "color imbalance". :^)
>> > I guarantee most will notice a difference between Bflat horns and G
>> > instruments.
>> >
>>
>> This is exactly why I want it to pass!! :^) It would sound better!
>
>To each his own. Bflats don't kick like G's, so it's G's for me.
>
Well, I don't think volume between the two will really be that different. I
think I can play louder on my trumpet, even (but not sure).
>> >
>> No, that's not what I said. Better instruments would differentiate the
>amount
>> of time and effort our kids put into their performances, IMO.
>
>Sorry, I still don't get the gist. How will "better" instruments
>accomplish this?
>
Because you will spend less time getting kinds to adjust to the pitch of the
horns, and the VASTLY different intonation characteristics (yes, you can play a
bugle in tune, you just have to fight harder).
>Thanks for the discussion Don.
No problem :^)
DTaylor91
>
>CRBPCB wrote:
>
>> I have to strongly disagree. Because of the fundamental length and
proportional
>> bell size, the G instruments are much more powerful and robust than their
>Bb
>> counterpart.
>
>Col. Custer's bugler played a Bb horn:-)
Funny, I kinda feel like Custer's bugler in this discussion :^)
Don Taylor
LEG at cba
In article <78lln8$69v$1...@infoserver.bgsu.edu>, dmc...@bgnet.bgsu.edu (Diana
Marie Cook) writes:
>On the other hand... I call on the veterans of the 60's and 70's to speak
>up here. When we went through valve-rotors, 2-valves, and on to
>3-valves, who offered up a similar debate? Did anyone (and I'm seriously
>curious here) think it would de-evolve drumcorps to have 3 valves on the
>horns?
You asked....
I don't think anyone who knew what they were talking about was opposed to the
change from G-D to G-F and the subsequent changes from piston-rotor to 2
vertical piston valves and then to 3 valves. However, this was never as
significant as changing the key of the instruments OR changing the basic
acoustic properties of the instruments.
Oh, I noticed at least on corps in DCUK went back to G bugles after a trial
with B-flat. I can't remember the corps, but it was discussed on their web
site.
Larry Girard, Jr.
mik...@my-dejanews.com
mca...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> I'd have to disagree. Corps people are renowned for their preference
> of instrumentation. We've even been called elitist because of it. That
> doesn't just go away if Bflats/electronics/ are introduced.
>
Do you think kids will not join a corps or quit the one they are a member of
(in any large number, anyway) if they see that it is using an instrument they
are already familiar with? Or that it uses an electric bass/keyboard?
>
> Wait until critique. If these go through I guarantee corps will lobby
> for higher scores due to the electronics/brass they use. They did/do
> it with marching - we march faster, that's harder, we deserve the
> higher score - they'll do it with electronics.
>
Adding electropnics/'traditional' brass doesn't in and of itself add anything
to the score. If they use the electronics effectively, they can then 'lobby'
for credit, of course, based on the performance, not just their presence.
>
> Two different groups - members joining, fans leaving. Different
> reasons for both - ultimately not comparable.
>
Sure, in that I don't see either happening to any great extent. I don't see
hordes running to JOIN a corps, and I don't see hordes of fans leaving corps
if the changes are adopted.
mik...@my-dejanews.com
frank...@aol.com (FrankAreMe) wrote:
>
> I just don't want to see hordes of anything coming or going!
>
Well, I'd like to see hordes COMING to shows and/or joining to march. :-)
I just don't see the rule changes having any vast difference on either.
>
> One thing--one person said it would be a staff member running the soundboard,
> others have said it would be one of the marching members--which brings me to
> this:
>
> As things are now, staff members cannot (play something etc--can they still
> direct like they could direct concert in the old days?)aide during the actual
> performance of a show. Wouldn't the staff member running a soundboard then
> have an actual affect on the performance which is subject to judging?
>
That is something to be worked out, I guess. My own preference is that during
the performance, any adjustments would have to be done by one of the
performers. Prior to the performance, staff should be able to help set it
up, just as they tune the horns and drums today.
> Side note, I'm really glad to see this debate being so civil. Many of us
have
> very strong opinions on the electronics and any-key issues and so far we've
all
> conducted ourselves quite well when you compare it to recent RAMD history!
Yes it IS nice, isn't it! :-)
>
> I still have problems with any key instruments and electronics. Maybe if we
> could get a horn line together--a top 12 hornline--and play the same music on
> a set of G bugles and then on marching band instruments, the debate would be
> over as to what is better for the outside. I still say, judging from the Star
> of Indiana/Canadian Brass cd that the G's would win.
>
I don't see it deciding anything. You'd have those who prefer G horns and
those who prefer Bb, IMHO. You prefer, after the years of exposure you've
had, G horns and all acoustic. Others might prefer the sound of band brass
instruments and electronics where appropriate. I think the debate would
continue.
mik...@my-dejanews.com
William A Roderick <Bil...@concentric.net> wrote:
>
> I mentioned this before, remember back in 74 when rules for entering the field
> changed? The corps that "chose"
> to enter the starting line were dumped! Why? Because they were told they were
> behind the times.
That's just those silly visual judges! :-)
And, IMHO it was wrong.
>Judges are human (I know this may be a shock to some of you)
,
> some of those judges will be affected by the fact that a corps chose not to
use
> electronics.
Hopefully the judges of today are experienced enough to NOT demand instruemnts
that might not be appropriate to the music selected.
MIKE DUFFY
DTaylor91 wrote:
Even "Golden Hair" couldn't "Stand" him:-)!!!
mik...@my-dejanews.com
mca...@mindspring.com wrote:
> > >
> > I see little in the way of Schonberg on the field.
>
> Well my educated guess is most people don't have to go as far as
> Schoenberg to get turned off. You're talking about the "Outer Limits"
> of accessibility.
>
How many DC folks in 1955 would have considered "Russian Christmas Music" the
Outer Limits? Times DO change, and hopefully for the better. As much as I love
the Skyliners "Little Ol' NY", I also love "Year of the Dragon" by the CBC.
>
> > looking at Highsticker's list of reps for this year it shows a
> > pretty wide range of reps.
>
> The beginning of what I hope is a much needed swing back to a
> reasonable middle ground.
>
I would hope that ALL styles of show get equal time. I like symphonic best,
but I also loved to hear SOA doing "Georgia". Or SCV's "Phantom", or ....lots
of non-symphonic music.
>
> And DCI was formed in 72 to pursue those new show ideas. That change
> worked, but simply because it did is not reason to believe this one
> will as well.
>
Past performance is no guarantee of future success? Sounds like a commercial
for a mutual fund. :-)
But, seriously, it just might work.
>
> I agree that these are factors. But to entirely dismiss programming as
> a reason for decline in attendance is simply ignorant of the
> situation. How many people have to say they aren't enjoying the new
> repertoires in terms of accessibility before it's considered as a
> reason we've lost fans?
>
No, I just don't agree with that one. Sure, you get people here on RAMD who
don't like the shows of today, but there are others who do like them. Some may
not go anymore, but others take their place. My opinion (and that's all it is)
is that those factors I mentioned are the major reason for the decline.
> > >
> > Win-win. Everyone gets to play on better instruments.
>
> Again, better is relative to perspective. G instruments are much
> better for outdoor use, and I just plain like their sound better than
> Bflats. Read Peter Bond's brilliant post on the topic.
>
And Don's and Jeff's equally brilliant rebuttals. :-)
Having equally respected brass folks on both sides of the issue makes for
interesting reading and is quite informative.
I like the sound of corps. I also like the sound of band brass. It IS
different in timbre', but it's not inferior (IMHO, of course).
> It's actually win- . . . . . there is no difference so corps loose
> their unique sound and merge into homogenization with bands. If drum
> corps is to survive it has to push it's uniqueness.
>
I guess we'll just always disagree on this one! :-)
> > >
> > Consistent in that I don't like a lot of rules against this or that for
> > artificial reasons.
>
> Electronics ARE artificial. That's quite a paradox eh?
>
By artificial I mean making all sorts of rules against this or that.
Basically, I'm not a 'rules' kind of guy, I guess, at least where it affects
creativity.
>
> This activity is acoustic, that's part of it's draw. If we add these
> proposals drum corps takes a huge step into the Wal-Mart of the
> marching "industry".
>
I prefer acoustic myself, in most cases. I just don't like to see it
mandated. In some cases, adding an electronic rhythmn section might make
great sense. I would hope that designers would consider the additions as
available colors, NOT mandatory ones, and use them where appropriate.
> > I'd prefer to give the show designers as much latitiude as possible.
>
> Show designers have had WAY too much latitude in the last decade IMO.
> The contest is supposed to be decided by the members and their
> abilities, not the adults and their designs.
>
> Some designers have done all right with the freedom, others have not.
As in any endeavor. Some are successful and some are not.
> Michael Cesario actually blamed the members (amateurs) for shows that
> didn't work (DCI Today). That statement is indicative of a design
> mindset with far too much liberty.
>
No, it's the mindset of an arrogant individual that IMHO is totally wrong.
Fix the attitudes of those in the wrong; don't fetter those who can use the
freedom wisely.
HFMoon
>quality of what you hear. I'm sure a lot of drumcorps audiences are not aware
>of the wonderful colors of sound, and expressive qualities of a marimba or
>vibraphone, simply because you have to beat the starch out of it for it to be
>heard outdoors more than 10 yards away. These are great sounds that aren't
>available because of how hard they have to be played, and the types of mallets
>used on them to get them to project. The bigger issue is that the playing
>techniques used to get the amount of sound out of these instruments are
>nothing short of child abuse.
I'm sorry, but I cannot even begin to agree with this, or even give it a
moment's credibility. You see, I'm watching my tape of '91 Santa Clara, and
they've just started the ballad.......odd, with the whole hornline playing,
faving forward even, I can still hear all the tone and beauty of the pit, and
it certainly doesn't look like they're having to beat the living hell out of
their instruments. It's also interesting to me that my girlfriend who marched
one year and doesn't listen to DC regularly at all not only manages to pick out
her part in the pit of the '94 Freelancers during the Park-and-Blow, but hears
things she had forgotten were there.....
I'll believe all this claim about the need for pit amplification when I go deaf
and can't hear the pits anymore....and even then, I'll probably opt for the
hearing aid.
Richard, Euph
<*>
"My maker was some geek in a lab coat, with an eye-dropper and a petri dish.
What do I need to make peace with him for?"
-Col. T.C. McQueen
The Angriest Angel
dva...@aol.com
>
>
> CRBPCB wrote:
>
> > I have to strongly disagree. Because of the fundamental length and proportional
> > bell size, the G instruments are much more powerful and robust than their Bb
> > counterpart.
>
> Col. Custer's bugler played a Bb horn:-)
Not for very long though...
BTW, great post Pete.
Dave Adams PR '78
Michael Cahill
mik...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> In article <36ADE24A...@mindspring.com>,
> mca...@mindspring.com wrote:
> >
> > I'd have to disagree. Corps people are renowned for their preference
> > of instrumentation. We've even been called elitist because of it. That
> > doesn't just go away if Bflats/electronics/ are introduced.
> >
> Do you think kids will not join a corps or quit the one they are a member of
> (in any large number, anyway) if they see that it is using an instrument they
> are already familiar with? Or that it uses an electric bass/keyboard?
I don't know. Why don't you ask them. From what I've heard here and in
email they don't want the changes. You'd have to ask them if they'll
leave if it changes.
My point above also included fans.
> Adding electropnics/'traditional' brass doesn't in and of itself add anything
> to the score. If they use the electronics effectively, they can then 'lobby'
> for credit, of course, based on the performance, not just their presence.
It will be a factor in scoring Mike, period.
> > Two different groups - members joining, fans leaving. Different
> > reasons for both - ultimately not comparable.
> >
> Sure, in that I don't see either happening to any great extent. I don't see
> hordes running to JOIN a corps, and I don't see hordes of fans leaving corps
> if the changes are adopted.
You still can't say that:
a) because members won't come - b) fans won't leave.
It's not logical at all.
> Mike
Michael
Michael Cahill
mik...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> In article <36AE6CD4...@concentric.net>,
> William A Roderick <Bil...@concentric.net> wrote:
>
> > I mentioned this before, remember back in 74 when rules for entering the field
> > changed? The corps that "chose"
> > to enter the starting line were dumped! Why? Because they were told they were
> > behind the times.
>
> That's just those silly visual judges! :-)
>
> And, IMHO it was wrong.
Guess what Mike, it'll happen again.
> >Judges are human (I know this may be a shock to some of you)
> ,
> > some of those judges will be affected by the fact that a corps chose not to use
> > electronics.
>
> Hopefully the judges of today are experienced enough to NOT demand instruemnts
> that might not be appropriate to the music selected.
Yeah, I'm sure the corps in 74 said "hopefully we won't get dumped for
coming on the field this way".
When I marched 83-87 judges wanted concert dynamics in the jazz we played.
While judging has made some strides in some areas, I don't see the
great "enlightenment" in the ranks as a whole that would ensure corps
weren't penalized for not having electronics. It won't be blatant -
but it will most likely be there.
> Mike
Michael
Michael Cahill
mik...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> How many DC folks in 1955 would have considered "Russian Christmas Music" the
> Outer Limits? Times DO change, and hopefully for the better. As much as I love
> the Skyliners "Little Ol' NY", I also love "Year of the Dragon" by the CBC.
Mike, regardless of the "times", Schoenberg is out there. Just because
the staff changes the repertoire doesn't mean the audience follows in
taste. If times have changed so much, why are orchestras strapped for
cash and subscription patrons?
> Past performance is no guarantee of future success? Sounds like a commercial
> for a mutual fund. :-)
>
> But, seriously, it just might work.
But seriously, it might not. Can DC afford to alienate fans? IMO not
at this time.
> No, I just don't agree with that one. Sure, you get people here on RAMD who
> don't like the shows of today, but there are others who do like them. Some may
> not go anymore, but others take their place. My opinion (and that's all it is)
> is that those factors I mentioned are the major reason for the decline.
Well that's a change. Originally you said programming wasn't a factor.
> And Don's and Jeff's equally brilliant rebuttals. :-)
From what I've read, no offense to Don or Jeff, Peter nailed it.
> I guess we'll just always disagree on this one! :-)
Then explain something please. How does drum corps win if it becomes a band?
> > Electronics ARE artificial. That's quite a paradox eh?
> >
> By artificial I mean making all sorts of rules against this or that.
> Basically, I'm not a 'rules' kind of guy, I guess, at least where it affects
> creativity.
Right, but electronics ARE artificial - not acoustic. Your position is
a paradox.
> I prefer acoustic myself, in most cases. I just don't like to see it
> mandated. In some cases, adding an electronic rhythmn section might make
> great sense. I would hope that designers would consider the additions as
> available colors, NOT mandatory ones, and use them where appropriate.
The question is this, is it really necessary or are these proposals
simply about some bored arrangers who need to find another idiom to
"express" themselves in?
The members aren't clamoring for electronics or Bflats - I thought
corps was about them first.
> > Michael Cesario actually blamed the members (amateurs) for shows that
> > didn't work (DCI Today). That statement is indicative of a design
> > mindset with far too much liberty.
> >
> No, it's the mindset of an arrogant individual that IMHO is totally wrong.
Cesario is frequently held up as one of the "leading minds" in design,
and has quite a large degree of input as to where DC will head and how
they'll get there. Wrong or not people listen to him.
> Fix the attitudes of those in the wrong; don't fetter those who can use the
> freedom wisely.
Unfortunately, that mindset doesn't stop at Cesario alone.
Ultimately it's a powerful minority who will dictate the future of the
activity. And unless these individuals are held accountable to the
members, the mindset won't change.
That's a large reason why we need rules in the first place Mike.
It's one thing to give a designer freedom on canvas, paper etc. It's
quite another to give them free reign when DC members are the "canvas"
for the designer/arranger's "expression". Especially when those
members are PAYING to do it. Last time I checked performers in the
arts were getting paid to perform, not the other way around.
> Mike
Regards
Michael
SC Sader
been just a fan, but I have sat next to the judges at DCI II/III prelims and
their comments seemed resonable in length. I am anxious to hear from current
staff and members about this.
Mike Dubil
BAC 81-82
SC Sader
use over there but not legal yet here. At the time, I was against them because
I thought the intonation was really poor. When they were made legal and came
out here, they had improved that. Most people were for the adding of the valve
because it made it possible to write shows lower and therefore more accessible
to less experienced players. PLEASE keep them in G!
Mike Dubil
BAC 81-82
MIKE DUFFY
FrankAreMe wrote:
> I just don't want to see hordes of anything coming!
>
Trying not to beat "A Dead Horse," I'll "Trot" this out anyway:
Me thinks Frank's snipped post was a direct quote from
"The King of The Little Bighorn:-)"
McTaps in Bb :-(
Jeff Mitchell
LEG at cba wrote:
> In article <78lln8$69v$1...@infoserver.bgsu.edu>, dmc...@bgnet.bgsu.edu (Diana
> Marie Cook) writes:
>
> >On the other hand... I call on the veterans of the 60's and 70's to speak
> >up here. When we went through valve-rotors, 2-valves, and on to
> >3-valves, who offered up a similar debate? Did anyone (and I'm seriously
> >curious here) think it would de-evolve drumcorps to have 3 valves on the
> >horns?
>
> You asked....
>
> I don't think anyone who knew what they were talking about was opposed to the
> change from G-D to G-F and the subsequent changes from piston-rotor to 2
> vertical piston valves and then to 3 valves. However, this was never as
> significant as changing the key of the instruments OR changing the basic
> acoustic properties of the instruments.
>
The change from G-D to G-F (Olds Ultratone) was the most significant change for
bugles and pehaps, the entire activty. This change brought a nearly chromatic
instrument into the arranger's hand and a tuneable bugle into the players hand.
All the judging changes over the years to keep up with the performance advances
in the activity started with brass and those new bugles.
1st sub-caption on Performance- Content Analysis on the Execution sheet circa
1970
1st non-tick performance sheet- Musical Analysis circa 1972
1st music (brass and perc) subcaption Balance on Ensemble Execution 1979
All these new evaluations and focus on performance were the result of tuneable
instruments. The G-F horn with F# rotar allowed arrangers to write some great
music that wasn't possible with a G-D horn. Star 1991 was played on 2 valve
horns, the same instruments essentially we switched to in 1968, this would have
been impossible on G-D equipment.
If we change to multi-key brass, there is no gain for arrangers. The performers,
may have better horns, but there is nothing as significant as the change to G-F.
The difference in brass lines from the 65-67 to the 68-70 was dramatic in both
show design and performance.
Jeff
Zig-A-Du-But
Besides, the tape is for the Judges to talk on... If it was limited to
90/10 then, I'm guessing this would be so you could listen to your show,
which isn't the point, you CAN hear through the judges, so it don't matter
how much they talk, and if they are giving us relevent information, then
talk away... If the're just babbling, such as 'Well, hmm, so... ahh, I
see....' and crap like that, then they shouldn't be alllowed to do THAT...
mik...@my-dejanews.com
mca...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
>
> > Adding electropnics/'traditional' brass doesn't in and of itself add
anything
> > to the score. If they use the electronics effectively, they can then 'lobby'
> > for credit, of course, based on the performance, not just their presence.
>
> It will be a factor in scoring Mike, period.
>
Only if used well on the upside or poorly on the downside. The mere presence
won't be a factor; it's how they are used if present that will affect the
score, just like any instrument.
> > > Two different groups - members joining, fans leaving. Different
> > > reasons for both - ultimately not comparable.
> > >
> > Sure, in that I don't see either happening to any great extent. I don't see
> > hordes running to JOIN a corps, and I don't see hordes of fans leaving corps
> > if the changes are adopted.
>
> You still can't say that:
>
> a) because members won't come - b) fans won't leave.
>
> It's not logical at all.
>
Geez, I'm not equating the two, I'm just saying that I don't see either, as
separate events, happening if the changes are made.
Mike