Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 11/16/2017 in all areas

  1. 5 points
  2. 3 points
    I know that we are discussing the act of omitting material based on copyright laws now but I wanted to reiterate that wicked game has been cut from the performance titled wicked game.
  3. 2 points
    If they're charging astronomical amounts of money, to me that's similar to saying "no"... it's like they're saying "I don't really value you spreading my work to a larger audience, but I guess if you are willing to part with this exorbitant amount of money I can take it off your hands for ya..."
  4. 2 points
    That, and the beginning (Fly to Paradise) to Crossmen's show in 2015.
  5. 2 points
    I’m glad that there’s a policy in place(now). My hope is that it will be fully enforced.
  6. 2 points
    We just need to get rid of this bot, it's broken and worthless. Also I'll come on to the site and just leave because I don't want to search 12 pages deep for the thread I care about.
  7. 2 points
    Literally one of the very few fantastic uses of a vocalist ever in the marching arts... How dare they...
  8. 1 point
    They are doing a La La Land show, and going to California haha... You laugh, but.....
  9. 1 point
    maybe we'll get a Houston hinting after auditions there this weekend.
  10. 1 point
    In the spirit of that show... Mike
  11. 1 point
    This is the common criticism of this idea, and it's not wrong. But consider this: no corps plays music verbatim anyways, and even after someone (super talented) has arranged it, staff (other than arrangers/composers) make tweaks literally all season. We're at the point now where you don't even need an actual musical score by all days - just a framework that can be adjusted throughout the season. You'd eventually just get decent composers and great tweakers (wrong word?) evolving within the drum corps activity, just like we have great visual techs and designers that have evolved over time. Also with the rise of electronic music composers who can literally put together a 20 minute musical program in a few hours, combined with the rise in transcription software, writing an all original musical framework doesn't feel difficult at all anymore.
  12. 1 point
    One reason is video rights are not the purview of the individual corps.
  13. 1 point
    If their show is timed at 10:30 this is around 23% of the show. That's a tough loss, especially since WG is a major highlight of the show. The 3:14 for the Blue Stars is a big hit.
  14. 1 point
    John, We rarely agree on anything. You don't have to be insulting about it. I just don't think you should put words into people's mouths... I've dealt with Tresona in the past and I know what they do. What gives you the right to put your values on others and backhandedly call them stupid because they don't share your view of things? Nothing. You're just a know-it-all bully and condescending, and it gets old. Your opinion is yours and other people can like or dislike an organization for whatever reason. As far as Tresona... "They're really a very aggressive company that came out of nowhere with untested theories," Craig said. "We're thrilled for Mr. Carroll to have defeated Tresona. Tresona's a very aggressive copyright troll." http://www.latimes.com/socal/burbank-leader/news/tn-blr-me-music-suit-20161230-story.html
  15. 1 point
    Because DCI may not have been fully compliant with copyright laws. Or they may have been. We don't know. What we surmise is that a couple years ago, DCI received a letter from a deep-pocketed firm that manages the copyrights for a significant portion of the world'd published music, threatening to sue DCI for supposed breaches. We will never officially learn more than that, because whether or not DCI might have been legally in the right, apparently they realized they couldn't afford to fight, so they came to a new agreement with that company. One guess that has been put forward is that, while DCI obviously had obtained licenses for its video products through the years, and especially since the turn of the century, they may or may not have acquired licensing for (1) material initially sold on VHS to be sold anew on DVD and more likely (2) some material appeared on the Fan Network, a platform that might not have been encompassed by their earlier video licensing permissions, and that may have have left them vulnerable to this attack. The first hint that DCI's audiences had about something being amiss came about three years ago, as I recall, when without any notice about a third of the videos on the Fan Network were taken down.
  16. 1 point
    I think the decision should be about what is best for DCI. And what would have been best for DCI, to me, would be for the world to see the five best corps at the time, as determined by the most recent scoring. Showing a non top 5 corps with the others would have been confusing to a TV audience, would have had to have been explained, and would not have shown the scouts In the best light anyway. It sounds like they did the right thing. Playing at least a brief excerpt of the winning 1988 show though, especially that amazingly intense ending, would have been awesome.
  17. 1 point
    Ho hum, another later DCP news thread posting about something announced and discussed on DCP last week. Doesn't the "news" editor of DCP read DCP?
  18. 1 point
    i thought this thread was entitled Cadets 2018 speaking of now and of the future.
  19. 1 point
    I feel differently about this. I am not aware of the argument that took place other than what I have read, but to me I never cared for the defending champ going on last. I would hardly call it a time honored tradition -- it was just a tradition that ultimately meant nothing, at least in my eyes. Eventually that tradition was going to unravel when PBS began to change their program coverage of Finals, some years only showing the top 5, maybe top 6 corps. Once that happened I absolutely feel that the top 5 or 6 in that order should get on TV. If this was the case in 1989 with PBS only showing the top 5, then I have no problem with the other 5 directors voting against Madison and telling them to go on in order of placement. That tradition was bound to change, and because some people cling to traditions there is no doubt it was going to cause an argument. It happens, but I don't think there was anything evil or childish about it. Perhaps it was just time to fight that rule and work toward something better and more fair.
  20. 1 point
    I don't agree with that at all. I'm an arranger. They made it *much* easier for me to figure out what music I can write for my band, how much it will cost in rights, and how easy it is to get. They cut down my workload substantially, and the whole system is automated. Tresona has saved me, and the bands I write for, a lot of time and money. Tresona doesn't make the law...but they do give us an avenue to follow it correctly. The fact that Tresona makes a buck off me and my band isn't something that bothers me in the slightest. There's a ton a value in the service they provide. They've also made it easy for me to sell my work to other customers, and for that I thank them. You don't hate Tresona...you hate existing copyright law. And so do I.
  21. 1 point
    Agreed. Though it would create an arms race for musical score writers. BD would have someone like John Williams cook something up each year!
  22. 1 point
    Emotionally, for this Sader fan, '99 Semis and Finals. My Saturday Night Live t-shirt has long worn out! Eat 'em up!
  23. 1 point
    I suggest you look up DCI 1988....
  24. 1 point
This leaderboard is set to Chicago/GMT-05:00