DCI Loopholes, Rule clarifications/changes?

[xandandl]

Although some will think that electronics have been discussed ad nauseum previously, new aspects have been raised from how corps performed this summer. The issues raised herein came from discussions this summer by reasonable current marching membership, BoD members and concerned instructors, all from several top 12 World Class corps. I was approached this summer several times by people who knew my former history with several successful World Class units. Those who spoke with me also knew that I had participated and voted in many of the early dozen DCI Rules Congresses. These folks raised some interesting perspectives which may soon need addressing at near future Rules meetings and votes, just as other circuits have at times had to augment their rules and protocol, even by intervention.. http://www.drumcorpsplanet.com/forums/index.php/topic/160807-our-future-visual-programs-consequences-and-concerns/page-4, post 34. The intent of my posting is speculation for the sake of clarification, not accusations. Examples have been chosen for the purpose of discussion with the hope of some better clarity in our rules and procedures. No charges are being made. It is not my intent to diss anyone.

*****

This summer, the use of microphones for performers influenced many shows, sometimes negatively as when weather interfered, etc. Kevin LeBoeuf and the Crown choristers proved that Major Tom and the show must still go on when they sang despite their microphones failing. Jordan Koenig, the Cadets’ expert narrator, did the same when his electronics system sometimes failed, although he was also backed up by a taping of his voice at least for part of the season. This was not lip-synching but real voice presence with support. Several corps miked their horn players and front ensemble. Bluecoats used a tape of their current horn line to make a popular pitch bend. Other corps used microphones and electronics to generate unusual sounds from the horns. And Blue Devils made a most obvious microphone a star for a midfield horn soloist standing upon his podium and facing away.

Suppose a corps tried to do a parody show. They splice into the show tapes of now-aged-out Cadet saying repeatedly, “That is what he said. That is what…said.” Corps already do that with spliced-in introductions of/by Dan Potter or Brandt Crocker announcing their unit. All three named here are over- age, two unquestionably so, Jordan once the 2015 season begins. Is he still performing, if only by tape??? What if Bluecoats take the pitch bend as an annual trademark item like Carolina’s closing Crown formation or Troopers notable sun-burst…and what if they were to use the ’14 tape because it was a better recording? Which hornline is the DCI performer?

Consider might a corps in fact substitute a perfect recording of a horn soloist whom we presume to be playing on the field before us? And would that recording which we think is being performed live in front of us be the sound necessarily of a member whose age falls within DCI guidelines? In other words, might a corps use a more professional adult’s solo and broadcast it as if by the soloist on the field? One has only to remember how the public and media were duped by the later revealed “lip-synching” of Yoyo Ma’s trio at Barak Obama’s first inaugural ceremony. Might a ring-seeking corps do the same? Remember that at least one past DCI overage scandal back East involved the complicity of both corps membership and corps management. Are we so different today? What does it mean to be a DCI performer whose age is not over 22 in this world of electronics, microphones, pre-recordings, studio adjustments and voice-overs?

Will the detective team of Moyer, Hope, DeCarlo and associates have to investigate solos, randomly pull the plug on electronics, or follow other measures to insure that the performance is truly done by members of this youth activity? The failure of electronics in bad weather would insure our knowledge of verifiable solos we presume. But suppose electronic systems advance beyond bad weather. Yoyo Ma showed how convincing it can be. Rather than this being a philosophers’ non question, it raises an issue: what do we mean by being a DCI performer? In the world of progress, change, and possibility, might we need to enlarge our definitions and interpretations to keep DCI a youth activity whose youth are the featured performers, not the studio technician? Discuss

Edited September 9, 2014 by xandandl

[N.E. Brigand]

spliced-in introductions of/by Dan Potter or Brandt Crocker announcing their unit. [both] are over-age...

As was Madison's announcer last year. And James Earl Jones for Oregon most of this year. And not-George Takei for Mandarins last year. And someone else for Mandarins this year. And Eminem (right?) for Spirit in 2012. And Spirit's detective the year before that. And BDB's detective this year. And John de Lancie for Raiders last year. And various French, German, and English recordings for BD in 2012. And Cavaliers' Warhol-announcer two years ago. And David Bowie singing "Nature Boy" for Cavs in 2011. And Etta James singing "At Last" for Blue Stars in 2013. And Patsy Cline singing "Sweet Dreams" for Music City in 2012. And Heath Ledger's Joker-laugh (?) for Cavs in 2010. And...

All of these overage performers apparently have been fine for more than three years. Personally, I don't care all that much if the rules are changed to allow over-age performers, or I could never enjoy a DCA show. I'm more bothered by the recorded part, since it means the performers on the field are achieving less live.

Edited September 8, 2014 by N.E. Brigand

[HornTeacher]

Personally, I am against any performance contributions provided outside the performing membership of the given corps. The corps itself is the competing unit -- not James Earl Jones, not Eminem, not David Bowie, Etta James, or Patsy Cline. The corps. While it could be argued that we allow the contributions of adults through the use of drill and musical arrangements which were created by adults, it is still, in the end, how successfully the corps members perform the show which they are given. If I am auditioning for entrance into a major school of music, it is a given that I would have studied under some exceptional teachers. However, whether or not I am ultimately chosen depends solely on my performance that day -- not on the credentials of those who have assisted me.

In much the same way, I am opposed to the use of any amplification or recorded media. If a solo calls for a big sound, I feel that it is up to the performer to produce that sound, rather than producing a lesser quality sound which happens to be falsely enhanced through electronic means to the level which is desired. As far as pre-recorded examples (such as narrations), what we are hearing is not the result of what is being created at that minute, and on that day. If your narrator is suddenly hit with laryngitis? Well...sucks to be you. Maybe you should have prepared a back-up for that reality (I think in the theater world it is called an understudy). The pre-recording of any performance used for competition will most probably be done through many "takes," and enhanced through sound mixing. Again, it would not be the product of what is being produced at that moment -- the very ideal behind multiple person or multiple group competition in the first place.

Competition is a medium of what is happening now...not based on the best example of a particular sound, effect, or contribution as performed, polished, and recorded days, weeks, or months ago. Somewhere along the line, I think we've lost sight of that simple premise.

Edited September 8, 2014 by HornTeacher

[drumcat]

Deep.

So, here's some thought for you... first, integrity will always be an issue, even though we say it isn't. I point this out because I think this line of thought has some merit. Examples include over-aged marchers in the past, and there are probably some that have done it recently. Who's to know? As for concrete rule breakers, the Blue Devils had a pitch-bend in their show during a year where they were explicitly not allowed to add effects. They won by less than 1 point, for the record, and I believe this was 06, or 07. It was the "Jabba the Hutt" laugh. It was a three-octave drop, and it was a pit kid doing the laugh.

Anyhow, competitive integrity is going to be an issue... but not a deal-killer. It's the compromise no one talks about with sampling. You can make all the arguments about amplification / sound reinforcement you want to, but in the end, you are left with someone controlling volume and volume envelopes. It's probably better for the activity than not having it, but that leads to the equipment used and the legalization of sampling. A few dials here and there, or an adjustment from the iPad in the press box, and you too can adjust the sounds coming through the PA. Sampling is the true problem, since you don't know what you're going to get. Is it licensed? Is it a dupe? Does it matter that it sounds like an announcer that isn't there? All of that stuff is actually more content-driven. One has difficulty in judging its merits, and you have endless threads on it.

If one wants to make an argument about fidelity of the performance, this is a simple thing. Whatever rules you set forth for judging, all you really have to do is to restrict electricity to the pit box. No mic'd solos on the back sideline. If a soloist wants to play into a mic, they should do so within a few yards of the front sideline. No system is perfect, but cheaters cheat when they can get away with it. Someone will know if that's within that distance. Judges won't be able to be fooled by that long term.

On the other hand, when you talk about sampling, it is anti-performing by design. Is that a good thing? Are effects a good thing? Should we all go back to 2004 and start over? It's hard to think that... but what I did see this year in the two shows I went to was that 10 years in, corps still have mic problems, amps are still hard to deal with because of their front-line proximity and wide acoustic spread versus belled instruments, and judges still do not penalize corps for technical problems.

I'd therefore submit the axiom that "you manage what you measure". The people in charge of rules enforcement are not capable in their capacity as show managers to look for infringement. If a show manager is shuffling on a corps, they aren't checking for whether there are brass patches in a sampler in the same way they don't have birth certificate checks each night. You can't measure this stuff, so it's not manageable. Maybe this means to the corps that maybe someone is driving 56 in a 55mph... does it really matter? Well, if it did, there would have been a title that changed hands... so clearly everyone has chosen that the blind-eye of enforcement is a compromise for the artistic canvas the corps want.

In other words, they know they fudge it, and they don't care. (IMO)

[IllianaLancerContra]

What if a corps did a Milli Vanilli show? To be true to the source material I would think it would need to be lip - synced.

All joking aside - Valid issues as brought up by the OP are but one reason I believe electronics should never have been allowed. Call me a dinosaur and I will reply "guilty", but that is my opinion.

[drangin]

Personally, I am against any performance contributions provided outside the performing membership of the given corps. ~~

In much the same way, I am opposed to the use of any amplification or recorded media. ~~

I agree, and I would extend my opposition to the practice of having over-age staff members standing off-field to run the sound boards. At a time when the electronics/sound design team can now comprise up to 100% of the sound the audience hears, how can it still be argued that performance is restricted to those under a certain age and within a certain number of performing members?

If overage staff members can assist with the sound of a corps, why can they not assist with the look as well by going onto the field to place equipment and move props? Last year, Phantom took two guards members off the field so they could wave the Witch's Dragon Wings (or whatever) at the end of the show - why not just let staff members do that, if they're off the field and out of sight?

Getting tired of hearing the activity is "for the kids" when most of what we hear is mixed by age-outs.

[Cappybara]

Personally, I am against any performance contributions provided outside the performing membership of the given corps. The corps itself is the competing unit -- not James Earl Jones, not Eminem, not David Bowie, Etta James, or Patsy Cline. The corps. While it could be argued that we allow the contributions of adults through the use of drill and musical arrangements which were created by adults, it is still, in the end, how successfully the corps members perform the show which they are given. If I am auditioning for entrance into a major school of music, it is a given that I would have studied under some exceptional teachers. However, whether or not I am ultimately chosen depends solely on my performance that day -- not on the credentials of those who have assisted me.

In much the same way, I am opposed to the use of any amplification or recorded media. If a solo calls for a big sound, I feel that it is up to the performer to produce that sound, rather than producing a lesser quality sound which happens to be falsely enhanced through electronic means to the level which is desired. As far as pre-recorded examples (such as narrations), what we are hearing is not the result of what is being created at that minute, and on that day. If your narrator is suddenly hit with laryngitis? Well...sucks to be you. Maybe you should have prepared a back-up for that reality (I think in the theater world it is called an understudy). The pre-recording of any performance used for competition will most probably be done through many "takes," and enhanced through sound mixing. Again, it would not be the product of what is being produced at that moment -- the very ideal behind multiple person or multiple group competition in the first place.

Competition is a medium of what is happening now...not based on the best example of a particular sound, effect, or contribution as performed, polished, and recorded days, weeks, or months ago. Somewhere along the line, I think we've lost sight of that simple premise.

You have it backwards. The solo's quality suffers when it is not amplified because the soloist is focusing too much on being loud. Tone quality suffers. Can you imagine SCV's solo in the ballad not being amplified? People probably wouldn't be able to hear it or the tone would not be nearly as pure. I'll take tone quality over a personal grudge on electronics and amplification.

[drangin]

You have it backwards. The solo's quality suffers when it is not amplified because the soloist is focusing too much on being loud. Tone quality suffers. Can you imagine SCV's solo in the ballad not being amplified? People probably wouldn't be able to hear it or the tone would not be nearly as pure. I'll take tone quality over a personal grudge on electronics and amplification.

The point of standing in a football field and playing a horn is to play it loud enough to be heard. I'll take the tone quality of an instrument that is projected to an audience over the sound of a flapping polystyrene speaker cone any day.

[Jeff Ream]

it is the slippery slope discussed on here before. Even in the band world, how can you enforce?

if someone has the stones to propose a rules change, and figure out a way to logically check for enforcement, go for it.

as for judges willingly ignoring balance issues, failures, etc, thats a whole other can of worms.

Edited September 9, 2014 by Jeff Ream

[Liahona]

You have it backwards. The solo's quality suffers when it is not amplified because the soloist is focusing too much on being loud. Tone quality suffers. Can you imagine SCV's solo in the ballad not being amplified? People probably wouldn't be able to hear it or the tone would not be nearly as pure. I'll take tone quality over a personal grudge on electronics and amplification.

Not to single you out...but I call BS on this comment...A well supported sound for projection will have plenty of good tone quality from the right musician...especially from a brass instrument...perhaps if you were playing an oboe then I'd agree with you...I could pick out umpteen solo's over the years to illustrate this very point...if the musician is being mic'd for the EFFECT then that is a different matter completely...