Grandpa Posted August 4, 2011 Share Posted August 4, 2011 A few should not affect DCI. However, my sense is that I'm not a part of a small minority. From what I've seen, there are a substantial number of disgruntled fans, a larger number of fans who don't care one way or the other, and a very small group of folks who love the new changes. Given that dynamic, I think it is in DCI's best interest to get rid of electronics. I am like a pig without a voice. I am disgruntled.... On the other hand, if they produce a scientific poll that finds exactly the opposite, I'll gladly put down my arms and join the Brave New World of Big Brother. :-) Wait a minute - I thought polls are never reliable on this stuff? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted August 4, 2011 Share Posted August 4, 2011 (edited) I actually am open minded, but have a short attention span sometimes. Just my nature...self centered, narcissistic and ADHD. I know I don't have Attention Deficit Disorder. I'm positive about that. Now, back to the topic here again. I think that... that its important to remember that... .... what is the topic we're on again ? Edited August 4, 2011 by BRASSO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted August 4, 2011 Share Posted August 4, 2011 A few should not affect DCI. However, my sense is that I'm not a part of a small minority. From what I've seen, there are a substantial number of disgruntled fans, a larger number of fans who don't care one way or the other, and a very small group of folks who love the new changes. Given that dynamic, I think it is in DCI's best interest to get rid of electronics. On the other hand, if they produce a scientific poll that finds exactly the opposite, I'll gladly put down my arms and join the Brave New World of Big Brother. :-) they did a poll. don't worry...while it won't be released, it backs you, me and others up far more Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielray Posted August 4, 2011 Share Posted August 4, 2011 A few should not affect DCI. However, my sense is that I'm not a part of a small minority. From what I've seen, there are a substantial number of disgruntled fans, a larger number of fans who don't care one way or the other, and a very small group of folks who love the new changes. Given that dynamic, I think it is in DCI's best interest to get rid of electronics. On the other hand, if they produce a scientific poll that finds exactly the opposite, I'll gladly put down my arms and join the Brave New World of Big Brother. :-) The forest always seems bigger when you're surrounded by trees. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted August 4, 2011 Share Posted August 4, 2011 I appreciate your point of view, but mine comes as someone who has spent 20 years of my career involved in setting up and managing performing arts non-profits, from start-ups to $4 million orgs, and my experience tells me that the product definitions (aka "what they do" and "how well they do it") are the single biggest factors behind finding public support for any new or expanding organization. The days of a few large donors getting together and deciding to create a symphony or theatre in their city have pretty much come and gone; since the 70s, the newest generation of major performing arts orgs are artist-driven, and that horse ain't going back in the barn any time soon. Well, then, we have a huge problem....because we took an activity with a clear definition, and have been moving away from that definition continuously for decades. Now, the answer is to replace it with an even more nebulous "product definition"? Even more to the point, people like to feel good about programs that get kids off the streets or provide performance opportunities for disadvantaged kids. But they're much less interested in funding programs for middle-class kids to do the same thing. Why? Because for most middle-class kids in the US, there ARE programs designed to give them musical or arts training and performance opportunities - they're called "school music and performing arts programs", and for most communities, they're already funded via tax dollars.So the basic purpose that old school drum corps served - organizing kids into groups and giving them performance opportunities - has been taken over by programs under the auspices of the local school board. That being the case, what possible rationale would Company X or Community Benefactor Y have to give money to someone to start up a program that will be, if anything, a LESS refined than the program already happening at the local high school? For the kids that go to schools that don't have one of those programs....or are older/younger than HS age. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielray Posted August 4, 2011 Share Posted August 4, 2011 ....and how to assemble an army of adults to serve as BOD members, design staff, support staff, and in a variety of volunteer roles. The corps that remain stable today are the ones that build these massive teams to tackle everything from feeding kids at the February camp, to running a fundraiser in May, to manning the side gates at the home show, to retrofitting the interior of the new equipment trailer, to writing 1000 grant applications....and so on. Which, again, is a business aspect of the organization... not really connected much with the artistic aspects of the program. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted August 4, 2011 Share Posted August 4, 2011 (edited) Oh, this is silly. First, hardly any objection is registered to this inane remark.... Again, no more small shows. Small shows are a complete waste of time. They require about the same amount to put together a larger show, but nothing near the return. ....inane because it's author has no problem with marching band events, many of which fit that same description. Then, just a couple of posts later, marching band gets mentioned coincidentally.... Such a thing as the OP describes already exists and it is called marching band. Flame away but that activity provides local and regional performance opportunities for far more kids than any drum corps circuit ever could and it is much more economically sustainable. Furthermore, WGI's winter guard and winter percussion programs also serve that purpose. They have been successful because they have found a way to be compatible with the public school system. If you insist that the drum corps activity absolutely must be a summer activity then I suggest you look closely at the DCI Open Class model. They only tour for 2-3 weeks and get to perform at one big event in a big stadium at the end of tour (DCI Finals). The corps do not get paid for performances which allows the show producers to pay their bills and make a little profit. Shows cost around $10 and get 500-800 attendees. Quite fun actually. The common link is that to make a small circuit work it has to latch itself onto something much larger to get economies of scale. The best bet for that is the public school system. These two posters have no quarrel with each other's points? I guess it's OK to spend money on unprofitable grass-roots marching events, just as long as it's the taxpayers' money. Edited August 4, 2011 by audiodb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted August 4, 2011 Share Posted August 4, 2011 In terms of expanding WC Finals to include everyone, that pretty much devalues the Finalist status. I'm glad to see such a tight cluster in the 10th-15th rankings right now, as it's good for all of those corps to have something to battle for, but if you lower the bar, you run the risk of taking the fun away from the kids in that position, since Finals becomes just another big regional. Few people seem to remember this....but the true purpose of "finals" was never to create "status" for the corps that made the cut. It was merely to enable a champion to be determined from among a field of a hundred competitors. The powers-that-be of the 1920s determined that asking judges to evaluate 100 full-length field programs would not be the most accurate and reliable way to determine the champion. Instead, they had corps present shorter programs so that they could all compete in a single-day preliminary round, figuring that the eventual champ could safely be assumed to be among the top 10-15 corps from that preliminary contest. But I guess that's just one of those "traditions" you were railing about earlier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted August 4, 2011 Share Posted August 4, 2011 Electronics are a done deal. Here to stay. Set in stone. The Queen of England will fly out my bum for tea and cucumber sandwiches sooner than electronics will be repealed. No amount of grumbling, complaining, shouting, petitioning will change this fact. People need to simply accept it and move on. Why are you so intolerant of change? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted August 4, 2011 Share Posted August 4, 2011 I stopped listening after you called Jester a good corps. I saw them several times. If Painful to watch and listen to equals good in your book, you and I sir, have vastly different definitions. This? From you, of all people? The author of the "save drum corps by turning it into super marching band" thread? Have you ever been to a marching band show? If so, I shudder to think what "commentary" you'd have. What Jester put on the field may have paled in comparison to other drum corps (particularly in the Western time zone), but why does that make it OK to rip on them in a manner that would not be tolerated if directed toward a marching band of equal caliber? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.