DCW article regarding touring . . .

[SomeOtherJoe]

If a problem exists, you won't solve it by changing the product. Drum Corps appeals to the same people its always appealed to: 1. those who are/were in marching band; 2. those interested in marching band; and 3. family of #1 and #2. And, really, it only appeals to a subset of that pool. It's not the product; attendance & participation has been diminishing for years. Changing the product might tweak the numbers one way or the other, but it won't eliminate the slide.

Likewise, adding woodwinds won't reverse the problem. It's a band-aid at best, temporarily increasing the overall pool. The problem of diminishing participation is relative to the existing available pool. Adding woodwinds will immediately increase the overall pool, but you'll still have the diminishing problem. At some point, you'll be back to square one, or, worse yet, you might actually have existing members opt-out.

If the national touring model is unsustainable, then figure out and adopt a transition plan to eliminate it altogether, or dramatically alter it from current form. Stop trying to figure out how to support it. Get rid of it! Cut down on the number of shows, embrace the younger/smaller OC corps, travel together regionally, put on larger (total corps) shows mixing WC & OC, work together to implement cost sharing wherever possible to reduce costs, hold regional championships that decide which corps travel on to nats, send the top x out onto national tour, switch off between west & east every other year, limit the number of national tour shows, etc. Whatever it takes, just put a transition plan to build up the regionals and eliminate "whole activity" nat tour participation. Those that don't qualify for nat touring can still compete at nats (shouldn't be a requirement), but they're not part of the nat tour.

In terms of participation, the key isn't the larger corps, it's the smaller corps. That's where the focus should be in terms of recruiting and churn. You hold clinics for high school kids that apparently do pretty well (and you should hold one at every show, especially if the number of shows is reduced). How 'bout holding clinics for the OC corps. Allow OC members a few opportunities to participate in all day clinics with the top tier corps. You can revolve the assignments allowing a mix of corps to spread the load and enable participation with multiple corps. If a kid marching in a WC OC corps gets the opportunity to rehearse with BD, SCV, Troopers, etc., then participation is more enticing.

Another option would be to eliminate OC championships altogether. After regional champs, hold tryouts for a number of "all-star" corps pulled only from the pool of non-qualifying corps members. The all-stars would continue on the nat tour and compete at nats. Member participation, if qualified, would be optional. In addition, those members that don't make the cut can travel to nats at the end of the season for viewing... again, optional. Should reduce OC participation cost, allow members a tiered price structure, reduce the time commitment, bring in additional "paid" viewers to nats, etc.

I dunno... obviously rambling ideas just thrown out there. Point is, if the nat tour model is broken, eliminate it. Don't hold onto the hope that a changed product will eliminate the problem. The product "has" changed, and the problem persists. Reduce the cost of participation, give more options for participation, increase the value of participation, reduce the overall touring commitment, and hold fewer, better stocked shows.

As an aside, I'd work to align specific corps participation to region. The college tuition model comes to mind. Allow any kid from anywhere the opportunity and ability to march any corps, but delineate between "resident" and "non-resident" and adjust participation costs accordingly. Doing so increases the likelihood that if corps "x" works hard to increase visibility in its own region, then corps "x" gets the payoff.

Edited November 8, 2010 by SomeOtherJoe

[FHdork]

Sarnia Sam's post on page 25 resonated with me...so a kudo from here...

This thread seems to have morphed into a 'why are we here' discussion -

Let me offer this:

Drum corps is the BEST activity for training young people to be highly - supremely - responsible. This is done through the entire 9/10 month process of the activity.

Most young people spend their summer either working a job (pretty good responsibility training...for 3-5 hours a day), or perhaps taking a class (fair training...3-5 hours a day...), or perhaps just hanging around (terrible responsibility training...16 hours a day...on the couch or with friends...).

Young People in drum corps are working their butts off...12+ hours a day. And they're being taught to be completely responsible for everything in their world...their show (visual and musical), their bus seat, their sleeping area, the schools they rent (their daily task...), and all the other aspects of a world class (I include open in this too...using 'world' as a compliment) drum corps.

Why is this important: because as long as we're selling drum corps to our communities as a product...a show...as entertainment - we're lost. If we sell it as 'the greatest responsibility training one can possibly get', then perhaps we begin to resonate with business leaders - with people concerned about the future and whether today's crop of young people will be ready to lead.

I believe drum corps vets (no matter from what era) are/were better equipped to deal with the enormous responsibilities of adult life than most, if not all, other segments of people.

Vets have been fired and hardened through a crucible...and after that they'll enjoy a reserve of personal strength and tenacity that will serve them throughout their lives.

It's not an easy sell - it will take work to put that message out there (drum corps is but the means to THAT end)...nay sayers will attempt to equate high school and college sports with us...and claim a vast superiority that does not exist - but drum corps has an advantage college sports does not: no one in drum corps has ANY dream of making any major league (unless you count the military bands and drum corps, or professional music performance...and most of the members don't actually want that).

Drum Corps is USING drum corps as a vehicle for something greater...it is not an end in itself. Paradigm shift - that, in my opinion, is a road to relevancy.

[bill]

From the many comments I have heard over the years from those attending shows, it seems to point in the direction of two items; the productions are no longer entertaining to the general public and the cost to attend a event relevant (fitting to) to the entertainment value the general public would like to experience is not equal.

[JimF-LowBari]

I took relevant to mean -to those who pay the bills; the audience. There can be a few layers of relevance, especially regarding to those who do the performing, but in the end money has to change hands for this activity to stay alive. Therefore I believe George meant relevant to the paying public - at least I really hope he meant that.

Regards,

John

Thanks John, I haven't followed this closely enough to have a clue on what was meant relevance in this case. Personally I'll go with the post above as I don't go to DCI shows because the cost in money and time (no close shows) isn't worth it to me to go see a show with the amount of entertainment I get out of it.

Disclaimer - not a slam on those who go, just my feelings.

[audiodb]

If you want to increase the size of the audience, work to increase the number of corps, since the audience for drum corps was and always has been those who have marched and those whose friends and families are marching today. The show designs have next to nothing to with it, but a less expensive, more localized form of competition for lower tier and mid-tier corps could (something that WAS part of the original G7 proposal, btw).

I'm sorry, but that is just plain false.

The original G7 proposal would have banished numerous corps from the national tour....not for a "less expensive, more localized form of competition", but rather, a situation where those corps "WOULD NOT be able to participate in any share or fund distribution" (p. 37) and would have "no real service offered" to them by DCI anymore (p. 12).

How would that increase the number of corps?

[audiodb]

You have it totally backwards. DCI went the direction it went because the numbers of corps fell and fell and fell...it did not cause that to happen, but DCI had to deal with it.

No, he had it right. There were 400+ corps when DCI started, and yet they adopted a strategy to serve 13 of them. Over the years, that 'number served' has been kept between 12 and 25, and the total number of corps has fallen from a near-historical peak to where it now asymptotically approaches the number of member corps which DCI truly serves.

DCI is targeting it's efforts at the scholastic music students precisely to try and bring in more audience and future members, as it should. Instead of 400+ competitive corps, there are thousands of band programs that could...and do...provide a lot of people to watch corps shows.

The reality is that there are not a large number of corps, but the potential numbers from the bands is many times greater than ever existed back in the day.

....and yet, we have 10% as many corps as we once did....and 1% as many corps as competing marching bands.

[Big Bad Bari]

No, he had it right. There were 400+ corps when DCI started, and yet they adopted a strategy to serve 13 of them. Over the years, that 'number served' has been kept between 12 and 25, and the total number of corps has fallen from a near-historical peak to where it now asymptotically approaches the number of member corps which DCI truly serves.

So before DCI who "SERVED" any corps? Was there some large group making sure all these 400 corps stayed alive by "SERVING" them? And if so please elaborate in what ways these corps were "SERVED" that helped sustain them.

....and yet, we have 10% as many corps as we once did....and 1% as many corps as competing marching bands.

Because Marching Band is part of the school system... IT USED TO BE FREE and helped feed drum corps ranks. Now it costs in excess on $1,000.00 to put your kid through HS band for a season. After that are you going to pay for DCI dues and tour fees? The easy access to band has killed drum corps as much as anything else. NO ONE CARES ABOUT INSTRUMENTAL DIFFERENCES EXCEPT FOR US OLD FOGIE DRUM CORPS SNOBS... SO it is ALL band to everyone on the outside.

I really grow weary of the waah waah cry #### and moan attitude of the folks who could be helping instead of whining. And if you have stopped going because you don't like it anymore... Great for you...It is too bad that drum corps has to hit on all cylinders every time for you. I just bet you have spent money on a concert you were dissapointed to see... I just bet you spent money on a movie you hated... So are you now a hermit who goes nowhere and does nothing because you cannot take the bad with the good? If this is the case please avoid using anthrax and the U.S.Mail system...

[mobrien]

I'm sorry, but that is just plain false.

The original G7 proposal would have banished numerous corps from the national tour....not for a "less expensive, more localized form of competition", but rather, a situation where those corps "WOULD NOT be able to participate in any share or fund distribution" (p. 37) and would have "no real service offered" to them by DCI anymore (p. 12).

How would that increase the number of corps?

Oh how did drum corps survive back when most corps were regional, and didn't have to look to DCI for sustenance? How EVER could grownups have volunteered time and effort and rounded up 50 or 60 kids to perform in a drum corps that was focused on weekend performances and part-time rehearsals when DCI wasn't there to make sure they were being taken care of?...

Corps that have no reason for touring nationally would do well to provide the backbones of stronger regional associations rather than tagging along and being programmed as filler in local shows. Does that sound heartless? Tough. This is still a business, and corps without the resources to mount first class campaigns to compete should consider whether their members and funders would be better served by being strong regional corps rather than also-rans on the national tour.

And IF DCI could establish a strong regional program (operating separately from the national tour), with the current Open Class plus some of the smaller WC corps as the start-up players in the league, they create a framework in which new organizations could see a path to competitive success. Give start-up corps a set-up in which they know from the outset that they're not going to be competing for attention with the big boys, but really competing against other units within a 100-150 mile radius from home, with a competitive format that lends itself to smaller units, shorter shows, fewer restrictions on programming styles, and limited instrumentation in the pits, and maybe, just maybe, you can find a dozen new groups out there who are willing to give it a shot. But the current model, with NO focus on regionalism, is a miasma that doesn't lend itself to fostering new competitors.

Small corps weren't participating in DCI funds distribution or service during the 70s either, when there were still more of them out there. What killed small drum corps was a combination of mismanagement, changing demographics with the aging out of the Boomers, a massive economic downturn in the mid-70s, declining membership and enthusiasm in veterans organizations, and - most importantly - the rise of competitive marching band as a free/cheap alternative to local drum corps. Well, now we've had 30 years to digest those changes and come up with some alternatives that can foster growth again, but thinking that the national touring model offers any solution is just plain foolish. It doesn't.

Come up with a form of drum corps that rewards innovation and GE, and create a set of regional leagues, and maybe you can spur some enthusiasm to get into the game. But it's going to have to be different from WC corps in order to work, since by the time most kids hit 17, they know if they're in an 'also ran' competitor in a game, and few want to keep plugging away in a situation where they know they have limited chances of winning.

Edited November 8, 2010 by mobrien

[audiodb]

So before DCI who "SERVED" any corps? Was there some large group making sure all these 400 corps stayed alive by "SERVING" them? And if so please elaborate in what ways these corps were "SERVED" that helped sustain them.

There were a number of local and regional circuits that served corps in the pre-DCI era....as did AL and VFW at the national, state and (occasionally) local levels. There were also independent show sponsors, including a few that established large events (i.e. World Open, U.S. Open) which served corps at both open-class and class A/AG levels.

I'm sure DCI provided better service to their member corps than their predecessors....but their predecessors did not limit the number of corps they served in the same manner DCI did.

Because Marching Band is part of the school system... IT USED TO BE FREE and helped feed drum corps ranks. Now it costs in excess on $1,000.00 to put your kid through HS band for a season. After that are you going to pay for DCI dues and tour fees?

Where are they charging over $1000 for HS marching band? And why? Perhaps it is time that marching band programs (at least, that one) look into ways to control escalating costs.

The easy access to band has killed drum corps as much as anything else. NO ONE CARES ABOUT INSTRUMENTAL DIFFERENCES EXCEPT FOR US OLD FOGIE DRUM CORPS SNOBS... SO it is ALL band to everyone on the outside.

That may become true someday....but so far, attendance for drum corps and marching band events over past decades suggest that audiences have cared.

I really grow weary of the waah waah cry #### and moan attitude of the folks who could be helping instead of whining. And if you have stopped going because you don't like it anymore... Great for you...

Who said I stopped going? As for helping, the majority of the 20 shows I went to this summer were volunteering for DCI....not that it should matter in this thread.

I won't even ask what you are doing to help....because you are free to post your opinion here whether you help or not.

It is too bad that drum corps has to hit on all cylinders every time for you. I just bet you have spent money on a concert you were dissapointed to see... I just bet you spent money on a movie you hated... So are you now a hermit who goes nowhere and does nothing because you cannot take the bad with the good? If this is the case please avoid using anthrax and the U.S.Mail system...

I don't know whether to laugh or report this post. "Please avoid using anthrax"??? I guess I'll just wait for the apology....

[David Hill]

I like it old, I like it new ... but I really do like ... and honor ... and respect the "relevancy" of drum and bugle corps.

And I had it brought directly to heart just yesterday.