A question for the purists: was there more that could have been done?

[BRASSO]

36 minutes ago, bluesman said:

if the design team believes that using amplification gives their show an extra edge with scoring, then there must be penalties when they fail.  

 Sure seems reasonable to me. We've heard the refrain." live by the electronics, die by the electronics". But when we think more carefully about these words, it really has not been what has been happening. In reality, the Corps are living quite well when the electronics works OR fails. There has been no noticeable drops in scores by the judges when a solo is musically poorly performed and ruined by electronic malfunctions so far as near as I can tell.

Edited August 14, 2017 by BRASSO

[ThirdValvesAreForWimps]

There will be a movement back to natural means and away from electronic enhancement.  This will correct itself rather nicely.

[Bobby L. Collins]

Just now, ThirdValvesAreForWimps said:

There will be a movement back to natural means and away from electronic enhancement.  This will correct itself rather nicely.

I hope you're right.  There's just so much self-indulgence calling the shots right now.

[ThirdValvesAreForWimps]

20 hours ago, Bobby L. Collins said:

I hope you're right.  There's just so much self-indulgence calling the shots right now.

That's a good way of putting it.  People of all ages are coming out of competitions saying they want to hear more of the raw non-amplified sound.  I went to a lot of live shows this year and this sentiment was nearly universal.

Here in the US people tend to believe change is always good but often it isn't.  I can live with shorter show time limits, Bb/F brass, and even non-traditional costumes.  These things still keep the performance in the hands of the performers.  The moment any electronic implement is introduced, especially synthesizers, the performance is now in the hands of the sound man.  That's never been the mission of DCI.  It's always been about the performers on the field until now.  Synthesizers can make a brass line sound WAY fuller than it is and to my ear I heard way too much bass from the pit and not enough from the tubas.

Self-indulgent people may be driving this train but it's going to run off the tracks.  Sane heads will prevail.  They usually do.

Edited August 14, 2017 by ThirdValvesAreForWimps

[Bobby L. Collins]

16 hours ago, ThirdValvesAreForWimps said:

That's a good way of putting it.  People of all ages are coming out of competitions saying they want to hear more of the raw non-amplified sound.  I went to a lot of live shows this year and this sentiment was nearly universal.

Here in the US people tend to believe change is always good but often it isn't.  I can live with shorter show time limits, Bb/F brass, and even non-traditional costumes.  These things still keep the performance in the hands of the performers.  The moment any electronic implement is introduced, especially synthesizers, the performance is now in the hands of the sound man.  That's never been the mission of DCI.  It's always been about the performers on the field until now.  Synthesizers can make a brass line sound WAY fuller than it is and to my ear I heard way too much bass from the pit and not enough from the tubas.

Self-indulgent people may be driving this train but it's going to run off the tracks.  Same heads will prevail.  They usually do.

Again, I hope you're right.  I can't help but feel very pessimistic for the future of the activity, especially with so many now indoctrinated into thinking all that crap is "kewl".

[DAYGO]

Silly rabbit, "Everything must change."

Signed,

The Blue Devils

[Jeff Ream]

On 8/13/2017 at 9:38 AM, StunnedMonkey said:

It was like that for Flo's BOA GN broadcast too. They clearly haven't figured out how to properly mic the announcer properly for broadcast.

"INNN44NN4444TH444THTHTHTHPLPLTHTHTHPLPLACEACEACE...."

placement of field mics is key. at too many shows Flo placed mics right in front of the amps

[Jeff Ream]

On 8/13/2017 at 9:59 AM, BRASSO said:

 GE Music  and Music Analysis is where the singing is judged presently. If the singer soloist... a major and featured character soloist in a show,. through the ineffective use of electronics in her show mangles her solo completely, and at 2 separate intervals in the show, yet there is no diminuation in these caption scores from the previous nite where the solos were effectively performed, lets be real here, DCI and its judging community has a major problem on its hands that has not been properly addressed yet, imo

agred....its on the sheets.....but it's not applied as it could. Should a score drop 4 points? No. But some tenths should be seen

[Jeff Ream]

22 hours ago, Bobby L. Collins said:

Now I want to dig in to the OP's actual question: Was there more that could have been done with the old style(s)?

Be advised, this is going to be super long, perhaps the longest post some of you have ever read.  If you're not going to take the time to read it all the way through, then you don't have much business commenting on it.

First, let's define the "old style(s)", and that's probably different for every single person here, but for the purpose of this thread, let's broadly define it as follows;

1). Pre-marching band horn rule change (so, G bugles, all reading treble clef, number of valves is irrelevant, as evidenced by USMC last night).

2).  Pre-any other instrument on the sideline rules (trombones, french horns, oboes, electric violins, etc.).

3). Pre-amplification (narration, vocalists, microphones in the front ensemble, clip on mics on brass instruments, etc.).

4). Pre-audio engineering (synthesizers, ambient white noise, electronic sound effects, pre-recorded sampling, manipulating on-field solos with distortion and feedback, etc.).

5). Pre-skintight spandex and lycra WGI costumes replacing corps uniforms, headgear, and regalia.

6). Pre-transition of guard from auxiliary units to the main attraction upon which every single production is designed.

7). Pre-mandate of every single production being built around expensive, unwieldy and potentially dangerous props that monopolize up to 20% of the field.

8). Pre-transition of brass and percussion from musicians to backup dancers and prop movers.

9).  Pre-transition from the emphasis of marching and playing to dancing and mugging for the camera.

10). Pre-transition of drum corps' demeanor from poised discipline to attention-seeking self-indulgence.

I wouldn't be so bold as to claim that every single dinosaur considers every single one of these "the old style", and I'm fully aware that many have an even longer list of grievances that go back to the 1950s, but the above are the current and most egregious and controversial issues.  So, let's go through these one at a time.

1).  I've already discussed G Bugles at length, and feel like I did an adequate job of debunking the erroneous myth that bugles can't play as well in tune as band instruments, but I'll expand on it.

Consider this.  Today, just about every brass player in every corps has the benefit of a personalized digital tuner clamped on his/her bell.  You think bugle lines wouldn't have benefited from something like that? Most corps were lucky if they owned ONE Strobotuner, and even by the late 90s, tuners weren't exactly cheap, or even that accurate. No, I say to the naysayers that if you handed Star of Indiana a bunch of your personal clamp-on tuners, you would be talking about how much better in tune bugles were than concert instruments are today.

Also consider this.  The level of intonation in drum corps today is GREATLY over exaggerated. Just watching the highlight reel last night (barring the first bit where all you could hear was USMC), I heard all kinds of pitch problems throughout......even among the medalists.  Most of those pitch problems were caused by amplification, but there were plenty of individual issues as well, particularly when someone was whizzing by a mic.  Now that said, those pitch issues were nothing that would have caused me to hop on YouTube and scream "THAT'S SO OUT OF TUNE LOLZ" like some of you naysayers do on old recordings, but those old recordings aren't THAT out of tune.  So don't try to paint a narrative in which the equipment and talent level today are miles above that of 20, 30, 40 or 50 years ago.  Some of those corps....some of those CHAMPIONSHIP corps, pulled kids off the street who weren't even in band, and some of those kids became legends YOU still talk about today.  I hear corps today focusing quite a lot on technique, but not so much on style or dynamic contrast.  After all, when you can play mezzo-piano, and the engineer can make you sound like you're playing fortissimo, then why not just practice finger patterns all summer?

Consider this as well.  Just about every single brass instructor in DCI today is a professional band director (many of them college directors), and the student/teacher ratio today is close to 4:1 (and even higher in some of the top corps).  20 years ago (and beyond), most professional band directors vehemently opposed drum corps (certainly not all of them, but the hostility was real, and palpable).  But since DCI got in bed with WGI and BOA, many of those same directors now embrace the activity, such as it is, with open arms.  Imagine, if you can, what hornlines from the 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s might have sounded like with a bunch of professional band directors practically giving private lessons to each member every single day for 4 months.  Me thinks your tune would change about bugles, then.

If you have never heard a bugle line live, then you don't have a leg to stand on when you start trying to compare them to modern corps' hornlines.  A Division II medalist could have played 5x louder at forte than any modern World Class unamplified hornline at fortississississimo, because bugles simply project better.  Imagine then a modern drum corps activity that doesn't require microphones and speakers for the soloists to be heard during a ballad in which the entire hornline is facing backfield.  Imagine, if you can, an unamplified opening hit that you FEEL rather than what you hear today behind synthesized bass through speakers on the sideline.  Even today, bugles can play all the same notes that band brass can play (unless you want to be hyper-pedantic and cite two valves and piston rotors, which cannot play 5 notes at most: middle E-flat, D, and D-flat, and low A-flat and G....Low F-sharp could easily be played by lipping down a G, and high A-flat could easily be played by playing it first valve with the first valve slide triggered in....those horns were barely even restricted in their range, and people today like to act as if they could only play 1 3 5 and 7).  Prior to the rule change, Dynasty was making some big strides in developing tuning slide triggers, so it's not like there was no one investing R&D into bugles.  Even today, there's a company making valved bugles (they're in B-flat, and from what I've been told they play more like Gansch-horns or cornets than bugles, but they're marketed as bugles, nonetheless).  The bugle isn't dead.  It just isn't "cost-effective" for a generation that doesn't know how to manage money and take care of what they have.  And the only reason in the world that a well-rehearsed bugle line couldn't sound just as good (if not better) than a modern-day band brass line is because a bunch of ignorant people who don't know what they're talking about are too busy saying "it can't be done" to even try to find out.

2). The push for non-corps instruments in DCI was the result of the love affair between DCI and BOA that blossomed at the turn of the century.  BOA has been pushing for trombones and french horns up on scaffolding for years, and the best way to achieve that was to con DCI into embracing it so that all the kewl kids would embrace it.  Advocates cite additional opportunities for expression with different timbres and subtle nuances on the field, and those same individuals turn around and advocate obfuscating all those different timbres and subtle nuances with electronic white noise.  The same can be said for the push for inclusion of woodwinds, citing "That would give woodwind players an opportunity to participate in this great activity".  Well, guess what?  Woodwind players have always been allowed to participate in DCI, as members of hornlines, drumlines, and guards, all within the parameters of the rules of the activity.  Rules that are being thrown out the window, replaced by a single rule; "Anything goes".

All these additional instruments being purchased and maintained by the corps, instruments that might be used for 30-45 seconds of a production tops, is a needless waste of money.  Money that could be spent for a thousand other things.  Drum corps fans have not been saying for the past 70 years, "You know what that piece needed?  Some trombones and french horns".  You know why?  Because they didn't come to hear trombones and french horns.  Because there were already baritones and altos on the field that can play just as expressively as trombones and french horns.  No, stu, they can't play 7th to 1st position glissandos, but you're putting an awful lot of weight on a comedic effect that has never once decided a placement in top 12, or to 50, for that matter.  There is not a single solo or sideline featurette that anyone has performed since the rule change that a soprano, alto, baritone, or contra couldn't have played with just as much emotion and proficiency, and with the added bonus of not having to depend upon amplification to be heard.

3). Proponents for amplification on the field try to pretend like anyone who hates it is a tech-illiterate relic of the stone age, and like to say "Things change, you either adapt or die, learn to love it or leave", and that's really their one note.  You can't expect invasive, overbearing, disingenuous, manipulated audio trickery to simply be embraced by 4 to 5 generations of drum corps fans who fell in love with drum corps because it didn't HAVE to rely upon invasive, overbearing, disingenuous, manipulated audio trickery to educate and entertain.  What is the lesson to the members today?  "Don't worry if you don't sound good, I can fix that on my mixing board.  You don't need to adjust, I will".  Imagine your favorite over-produced, over-sampled, over-amplified production from the past few years.  Now, imagine the entire sound system malfunctions and cannot be fixed.  Imagine what the show sounds like without the amplification, without the compressed bass patches, without the synthesizers playing oooohs and aaaahs, without the vocalists on 6 foot tall props singing, without the narrators screaming "YOWZA YOWZA YOWZA"....imagine all that's gone.  What are you left with?  Do you still like the show?  Do you like it even more?  If the answer is no.......then it's either a poor show design, or it relies far too heavily on amplification.  If the answer is yes, then why spend all that money on all that expensive equipment in the first place?  Rhetorical question.  The answer is, of course, one man's vanity.

A corps member, particularly a soloist, should live or die by their own talents and their own performance.  That's how it always was in drum corps.  But today, a corps member lives or dies by the talents of the audio engineer (who, by the way, isn't even a member of the corps) behind the console.  You saw and heard that happen last night.  In the years to come, when people talk about Crown 17, they're not going to talk about what went right, but rather about what went wrong.  Now, that's certainly not the first time that's occurred in DCI, but it's one of the first times it's occurred as a result of a non-member of the corps NOT doing their job.  As much as I vehemently maintain that girl shouldn't have even been there in the first place, I will also turn around and say, with the utmost sincerity and reverence, that it is extremely unfair to her that she won't be remembered in future for what she sang, but rather for what she didn't sing, and at absolutely no fault of her own.  What the hell kind of message is that for the youth in the activity today, who look to their instructors and directors to lead them and to guide them?  Is the lesson "Well, things like this happen, and you can't depend on anyone but yourself.  But here's your medal!"?

4).  Taking the above a step further, now we have corps who are designing entire shows around electronic effects, voice-overs, and pre-recorded brass lines literally replacing the brass on the field.  That is a complete waste of human resources.  I recall, not so long ago, a corps which is now in the top 10  managed to perform a special effect from a popular sci-fi movie soundtrack by simply taking advantage of dynamics, horn facing and the doppler effect.  As far as I know, there wasn't a shred of electronic trickery involved, beyond amplification (which wouldn't have been the least bit necessary).  The point is, there are all kinds of "special" effects hornlines are perfectly capable of executing without paying an audio engineer and wasting money on expensive computers and electronics.  It's simply a question of imagination from the instructors to find those sounds.  And frankly, imagination is the very thing that DCI is lacking most today.  For if not, then why does every single corps look and sound the same today?  Why does every single corps lean so heavily on electronics and amplfication?  Because, quite simply, they lack the imagination to do more with less.  THAT was a defining aspect of drum corps prior to these invasive rule changes.  

Consider Cadets 92.  Today, if they performed that piece, there is no doubt in my mind they would employ sampled machine gun fire (along with the sounds of B-52 engines over someone reading poetry).  It wouldn't even occur to them to have the snares crack rim shots instead (which is precisely what Holsinger intended).  That's just one example.  In modern DCI's quest to "push the envelope" with electronics and amplification, they have fundamentally forgotten that the human beings on the field are fully capable of "pushing the envelope" without resorting to artificial trickery and expensive hardware.

5). At the same time DCI embraced BOA, so too did it become enchanted with WGI.  Now we are seeing the full extent of that tryst; spandex leotards replacing corps uniforms.  The argument is "Oh you can move so much easier in them, and they afford a lot more opportunities for visual performance".  What that means is that it's easier to clean up their dancing when they're wearing dance outfits.  Now I'll talk about dancing a little further down, but the bigger issues with the uniforms are; 1). How incredibly unprofessional and ridiculous they look, 2). how they undermine the visual identity of each corps, and 3). How they are a slap in the face of not only the activity, but to all those who marched before them.  I get that corps regalia has been brought into question in the past (which I'm sure Guardling is about to remind us all about, yet again), but at the end of the day, throughout the 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s, it was STILL a corps uniform, the one identifying factor that told everyone in attendance who was lining up.  Today, that's not the case.  Today, everyone looks like they've dressed up to go cosplay at ComiCon.  You can't slap and X or a chevron on Underoos and call it a Crossmen or Phantom uniform.

Now, I know that's been that way for years in WGI, but frankly, DCI is NOT WGI.  Or, at least, it didn't used to be.  But there's another thing to consider about these new corps costumes.  They're skintight, revealing bodysuits.  How many hundreds, or even thousands of young musicians with the talent to make it in DCI today are going to look in the mirror and say "I'm too fat to wear those outfits"?  The psychological implications to the youth in the activity are staggering.  They're putting everyone on the field into outfits designed for 90-pound guard members.  And it's no secret that DCI has begun to only recruit the prettiest and hunkiest individuals with the whitest teeth and the clearest skin to act out these vanity projects on the field.  Basically taking everything that's wrong with Hollywood today, and applying it to drum corps?  Again, what kind of message does that send to young musicians in the broader activity?  Do you honestly think there would even be drum corps today if Gail Royer had told a prospective member  "You've got the chops, and your 6-to-5 is terrific, but you're just not trim enough for the uniform"?  But that is the message being conveyed today.  And that's the message you're going to deliver when you've allowed a bunch of choreographers and dance instructors to start calling the shots.  I was proud (and continue to be proud) of my corps uniform.  I'm just not so sure that the kids involved in the activity right now will be able to say the same thing in 10 years, much less 20.  A lot of us are genuinely embarrassed for them, and it's easy for a kid to be fooled by enablers around them saying "You look great! So proud of you!". 

I've seen people on here recently praise the loss of shakos, piths and aussies because they want to see corps members' facial expressions.  Is that really why you pay full admission price?  To see a corps' facial expressions?  That's another side effect of WGI's infiltration into the activity.  Now, instead of uniformity, it's all about expressing one's own individuality.  The opposite of being in a drum corps.  More and more, we see individuals mugging for the camera and vying for the attention from the audience (which they are being INSTRUCTED to do) than we see them working together as a unit to achieve a common goal.  You don't have to pay $4,000.00 a year to act like a precocious, spoiled brat.  The entire point of drum corps was to experience something different than what you can achieve with a webcam and a YouTube account.  But that's what they're being taught.  "Welcome to one of the most elite marching organizations in the United States, with over 50 years of rich history and tradition.  Now, why don't you stand over there and act like you're crazy for 12 minutes?  That'll really push up our G.E. scores".

6).  In the modern activity, such as it is, the hornline and drumline are both becoming more and more superfluous, being relegated to a back seat role in favor of the guard.  The overall thought from brass and percussion instructors seems to be "Sigh, well, if you can't beat 'em, join 'em", and so now we have an activity where the brass and percussion are for all intents auxiliary guard members.  More and more we're hearing less music, and seeing more shenanigans instead, all to the beat of the synthesized bass.  We're now outside the bounds of "Could they have done more back then", and firmly in the realms of "Why can't they do more now?".  No one......NO ONE.....goes to a drum corp competition to watch the brass and percussion push props around the field.  That's a glaring sign that you either 1). have too many props on the field, or 2). Have designed a show in which you have failed to utilize your human resources properly.  And it's very much a question of human resources.  Horns and percussion aren't there to be the color guard.  They're there to play their horns and drums.  Full stop.

That said, it's almost as if the horns and percussion are in direct competition with the guard for audience face time.  It feels more like an internal battle between the music educators and the dance instructors on the corps staff at this point, with the members stuck in the middle of this ridiculous tug of war.    Yeah, there was a little of that back in the day.  Phantom 91 springs to mind.  But in that instance, the brass and percussion played their instruments, and the guard did..........what they did.  Point is, no one asked the sections of corps of 15 years ago and beyond to pretend to be something they're not (notwithstanding Bluecoats guard playing sopranos in the 80s).  Since WGI took over DCI (and there's really no other way to look at it, that is absolutely what has happened), brass and percussion have taken a back seat to what can only be described as an increasingly out-of-control emphasis on guard and theatrics.  I'm not saying the guard is not important.  NO ONE is saying the guard is not important.  But WGI and visual techs are going to need to be told by SOMEONE at some point that it's not called "Summer Guard International", and every single individual with their hand in the cookie jar is to blame for that.

7).  Props aren't a new thing.  SCV has used them for a long time to great effect.  But if you take 89 for example, when folks talk about that show, what they say is "That's the year they played Phantom of the Opera.  Music of the Night is one of the best company fronts ever!  Oh, and The Phantom disappeared at the end".  If that production were fielded today, however, people would say "Oh yeah, I remember that show.  That's the one with all the boats and smoke machines.  I can't remember what they played, though".  It's to the point now where the props are the stars of the show, not the performers.  In years to come, when you think about Jagged Line, the first image that springs into your mind will be the prop.  That is the very definition of poor design and artistic bankruptcy.

If a corps can't compete without having to push scaffolding around on the field, then there's either a massive problem with the judging system, or the priorities of DCI and its members are wildly askew (it's actually both).  Why obfuscate half the field with 6 foot-tall ramps, scaffolding and trampolines and wind machines?  Why lug that crap around the U.S. all summer, which increases your costs, your bottom line, and your tour fees?  You've got over 57,000 square feet to march on, and you're wasting half of that on what can only be described as obstacles that get in the way of the marching.  Why do that?  For G.E. points?  Because BOA does it?  Because George Hopkins told you to do it?  Whatever the reason, it's cheapening the experience for the performers, and damaging the reputation of the activity.  Again, a kid doesn't have to pay $4,000.00 a year to go to a playground and swing on jungle gyms.  All those props is money wasted (yes, even if you medal, it's wasted), and there's nothing a single corps is doing with them that couldn't be achieved with drill or flagwork or the slightest bit of imagination and creativity.  All these highbrow people who talk about expanding drum corps into the third dimension simply don't get it.  THE MUSIC IS THE THIRD DIMENSION IN DRUM CORPS.  Always has been, until now.

8).  I've actually pretty well covered this, and I didn't even mean to.  Just to re-emphasize, the brass and percussion are there to play brass and percussion.  They're not there to move around the props, and they're not there to dance for 12 minutes.

9).  For as long as I can remember, there has always been dancing in drum corps.  Corps like The Bridgemen and Velvet Knights did it all the time; that was their schtick.  Pretty sure I even recall the Seneca Optimists danced a little in 76.  I don't know anyone who is really asking for dancing to be eliminated entirely from drum corps.  But here's the thing.  It's one thing to dance for 8-16 counts.  It's quite another to dance for 1,028 counts, and that is precisely what we're getting today.  Today, EVERY corps is the Bridgemen and Velvet Knights and Stamford's Marching Band all rolled into one.  Today, drum corps' identity is no longer one of precision drill and music.  Instead, it is one of precision interpretive dance.

Again, in what feels more and more like a bitter struggle between the music and visual techs of every corps, there are simply no moments when someone isn't drawing attention to themselves on the field.  Even while marching today, there's just a constant stream of knee-pointing, shoulder-swaying, plies, and mugging for cameras.  But more and more, there's no marching at all.  Just standing around gesticulating wildly, or rolling around on the turf, or staring at their hands like they've just put them in manure; basically a bunch of community theater acting warm-ups.  It has put drill design in the back seat, and it's beginning to do the same thing to music.  I think what a lot of people don't understand is this.  All the dancing and fidgeting on the field is distracting a lot of fans and supporters from being able to concentrate upon the things they came to see and hear; drill and music.  A lot of folks like to gush about how impressive they look and sound while they're doing all those moves, yet consider this.  Imagine how much BETTER they would look and sound if they were NOT doing all that.  They've redesigned marching shoes to make glide step easier.  But have they redesigned marching shoes to make doing the jitterbug easier??  Or are we inches away from entire corps switching to jazz oxford guard shoes?

So the question remains, did "old style" corps do all they could with drill?  Absolutely not.  Drill would have continued to evolve with or without G bugles.  Cavies 02 was just a taste of where we were headed.  But Hopkins had other plans.  The drill is what defined drum corps, but today, you might get 5 or 6 neat drill moves IF the design of the show allows you to stop standing around dancing for long enough.  Drill is simply no longer that important to the corps, to the judges, or to the fans that eat up all that dancing.   Someone mentioned that drum corps shouldn't have to cater to the lowest denominator (i.e., those who simply want bangin' tunes and bangin' drill), and I've thought a lot about that.  I propose that the ones who favor all the flash over the substance are the real lowest denominator.  But honestly, that's an irrelevant argument, for DCI is no longer accessible to even the common denominator.  And that's something the board is going to have to come to terms with down the road.  

10). Finally, there's the question of drum corps' military roots, and its role (or, more specifically, lack thereof) in the modern activity.  Watching the retreat last night, or awards ceremony, or whatever they call it today, I was struck by the complete and utter lack of discipline exhibited by members of every single corps on the field.  So many kids mugging for cameras, or taking selfies, or just generally trying to draw attention to themselves while standing in their blocks, all less than 200 feet away from one of the only drum and bugle corps left in existence in the United States.  I mean, what happened?  Why did we abandon standing at attention, standing still and not playing grab-### with each other, keeping our eyes forward and maintaining the level of self-discipline once flat-out REQUIRED to participate in drum corps?  Why did we allow a handful of individuals to lower our standards and expectations to such an abysmally pathetic degree?  

The argument of course is "They're kids, just let them have a good time".  Well, I stood in attention, and I had a good time.  So did the people who spew that nonsense.  "Well", they reply, "The world is different now, drum corps has changed.  It's evolved.  You have to evolve with it".  Why don't you tell that to the USMC Drum and Bugle Corps?  "Oh, well they're military, they're trained to be more disciplined".    So.  Were.  We.  And that's the crux of the issue.  Proponents of "SGI" talk about evolution and change, but in my heart of hearts, I strongly, no, I vehemently believe that what's happened to DCI and drum corps is not evolution.  It is DEVOLUTION.  Dancing, props, amplifiers and trombones were never the direction in which Ott, Sanford, and Royer were leading drum corps.  Not even George Zingali wanted.........this.  No, what's happened to the activity today is not the result of a mandate from the fans, members, directors, and youth at large, but instead from a man who manipulated everyone else into buying in to his snake oil to turn drum corps into an avant-garde, high-concept, high-cost activity for rich kids.  And many of you here very much have bought into it.  But to what end?  And at what cost?

Perhaps any one of these issues separately wouldn't be such a big deal.  But all of them at once?  No.  It's too much.  It's not a question of being too much change, but rather of being too much NEEDLESS change.  Drum corps doesn't NEED props.  It doesn't NEED singers.  It doesn't NEED amplifiers.  It doesn't NEED interpretive dance.  It doesn't NEED spandex leotards.  It doesn't NEED violins and flutes.  It doesn't even need three valves.  All drum corps needed for years was drums, bugles, rifles, flags, and competent instruction.  And you know what?  That is STILL all it needs.  All this excess, all this needless frivolity....it's not the way forward.  It's not sustainable, neither culturally nor fiscally.  They MUST dial it all back, before Drum Corps International innovates itself right out of tax-exemption.  The "old style" is never coming back, but unless the sensibilities of that era rule again, drum corps doesn't have a very bright future.  I only wonder, will the naysayers continue to call it "drum corps" when it's 12 stationary musicians on the front sideline while a 140-piece guard rolls around on the field for 8 minutes of jock-jams?  I hope not.

Anyway, that's just about all I've got to say, and I have to admit, it feels really good getting all of this off my chest.  I just hope it does some good.  Drum corps is too important to too many people to allow it to continue down this dark path upon which it has been steered.  I hope better people can steer it back.

remember amplification was pushed for the just the pit first. Most of the justification proved futile, but two things I have seen and do know:

 

it has saved many kids wrists over the years. no longer do kids have to beat the #### out of the equipment to be heard upstairs, and it has allowed for far more depth in arranging.

 

some pits have actually shrunk in size...look at Bluecoats

 

Edited August 14, 2017 by Jeff Ream
correction

[Jeff Ream]

19 hours ago, ftwdrummer said:

See, here's the thing...they didn't play exclusively stuff from the 70s/80s. Bottle Dance was most recently '92 (though it appeared earlier, of course). The Canyon was '99. Scheherezade was 2004 and 2014. Les Mis was 2013.

Snippets of this year might show up, but I doubt it, true. But to say that they played things exclusively from the 70s and 80s is outright false.

he's on a roll