SomeOtherJoe

The untold story that's been covered ad nauseam? Standing in the snareline that night. Noise on the field was so deafening, "we" could barely hear the hornline. One of the center snares -- guy who'd been there during the dance gone right -- YELLS at the top of his lungs: "listen in." Drumline immediately tuned out horns completely in an every man for himself effort to stay together... which we did. No chance hornline could hear one another side to side... NO chance... completely on an island... on their own. Once it started to phase, there was zero possibility for correction. Crowd noise on the field, given the acoustics & the ridiculous echo, was unreal. Echo magnified the sound... volume was unreal. Standing in the snareline for BD's La Fiesta a few years later, we got a fairly decent crowd reaction. Volume didn't compare. '82 SCV Finals Bottle Dance debacle... by far and away loudest volume at field level I've ever heard. Now, keep it to yourself... it's a secret.

I think context is probably relevant. Winning drums, horns, & guard is pretty unique (especially losing overall). I just look back at it more fondly than I think I would a win w/out the captions. If you framed the question "would you rather win with a superior design, or lose with a better performance", I'd go with the latter. Then again, drummers are a bit different breed, and we looked at things differently back then. We used to basically focus in on the section and figure, if you handled that, everything else would work itself out. Given the increased demand and responsibility each section has to the overall corps these days, it's pretty impressive when units can pull off a win coupled with a caption. Bottom line, though: I'm an old, selfish, drumline putz who, even if it was "just" the drum caption, wouldn't trade. Might make me a schmuck, but I really don't care. Winning corps would have been nice, but winning the caption was something we were "supposed" to do. Losing would have been a failure.

Interesting. I wouldn't trade my drum title, your brass title, or the guard title for the overall win. In fact, I wouldn't change a thing... even if those caption titles weren't attained. It was a pleasure marching in that corps, playing that show night in and night out, surrounded by that level of quality people top to bottom... a privilege. 30 years later and I still have a great deal of respect & love for that hornline & guard and what they were all about. I'll take that over an overall win any day. No thanks... no trade for me!

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.

I wasn't speaking about "corp arrangers." I'm assuming the fees have very little to do with them (whole 'nother topic... doubt seriously anyone "inside" drum corps is getting rich on drum corps). Likewise, I don't believe the original composers are "raking it in"... at all. Most modern day artists have sold their soul to labels anyhow (that's changing) and see very little and/or retain very little rights to their own material. Expert or not, I do have a problem with an industry that's transformed into little more than a copyright biz (there's a reason majors put out junk), I do have a problem with rights held by proxy in perpetuity, I do have a problem with the level of complexity & confusion present in today's licensing/royalty structure (especially taken within an international context), I have a problem with copyrights obtained/applied to derivative works, regardless of original artist's intent (see "the Amen Break"). I have a myriad of problems with the current structure (mainly, it doesn't work), and yes, I still think $250k for a season's worth of non-profit marching band is absurd. On the flip side, the current structure is what it is. People pay money for DVDs. One should make sure all the necessary rights are in place prior to putting on the production, or weave in 13 seconds of something else.

Interesting reading that article as copyright licensing is something that's peaked my interest w/in the scope of streaming lately. Also of interest was DA's defense of the current licensing structure in the linked article. May be worth nothing, but my personal take is that $250k in royalties & license fees for a season's worth of non-profit marching band performance, recording, and distribution is absurd.

The bolded part is my take as well, in terms of reasoning. Difficult to convey groove when the activity on the whole is striving for constant movement, constant velocity, constant transition, and 826 bpm. Yet, when the writing and parts are there, the groove is there... these young guys know full well how to groove. The point I disagreed with was the tie in to duts and met practice. To be fair though, the article has to be a bit incendiary. If it were titled "Tone Down the Duts, Turn Down the Dr. a Bit, and Spend More Time Sans Met", we'd have about 2 pages of conversation filled with "yup", "amen", and "yesiree".

I respect Frank a ton, but the things drum ensembles are doing today are light years ahead of what we did "back in the day"... LIGHT YEARS. I marched in one of those jonez lines he's referring to, and I always had a snare drummer to my left and one to my right. Now, you seldom see 'em marching together. They're spread out all over the field, split up into pockets of 3, 4, or whatever, and their interp of the downbeat often has to be different to lineup up front. It ain't the same... it ain't even close. They SHOULD NOT be heard out front (and I agree... penalize 'em if they are), but they're a necessary evil given today's ensemble writing & staging. In terms of the Dr. Beat, it's a rehearsal technique. We've all used it. I agree with the volume, and you're nutty if you don't work equal time without, but it's still useful and certainly not the devil's invention. As far as the "drum lines don't groove" comment, I'm not sure what lines he's referring to that "did" groove. Line warm-ups in the lot these days are nothing but groove. Every line has 'em, and a lot of 'em are pretty **** good. The lines in the late 70's / early 80's certainly had nothing on 'em... maybe lines were groovin' earlier than that and I missed 'em. I kind of understand the "hatred of the dut", but I don't get the "no groove" assessment.

Did the snares play much during Clowns?

****ing snare drummers... always causing problems!

Trust "my" judgement? That's your first mistake. They ought to enact a rule change: every corps, post performance, gets to stand on the track and watch the performance of the next corps. Fun to perform, but, in hindsight, it really sucked not being able to watch. SCV members took a day off in '83 and attended one of the MN shows as spectators. One of the highlights of the tour.

Definitely not the case. If an "A-game" was brought, it was brought in prelims. Not one of the better drum shows at finals, and prelims was much better all-around. In terms of the gap, BD was on fire finals night. Might not have had the show to win it, but they absolutely lit the place up. Performance of the night by far, in my mind. Still, to this day, remember the mass crowd chants of "East, East, East." Must have been pretty gratifying being on the field in a Cadets uni listening to the crowd. Crowd definitely enjoyed seeing a non-WC corps break through and finally get over the hump to win it all. Nearly 30 years ago... we're getting ancient!

Well, it's just personal opinion, but plug that show in on the west coast and I think you get a diff reaction. Personally, I thought they were flat on finals night... quite flat. Since I already stepped over the sour grapes line... ya, I was pretty bored by a number of sections (but, to be fair, there was some stuff I liked quite a bit -- there were moments in the show that were ###### beautiful, and that hornline "was" pretty solid). In terms of the marching, in retrospect, I think Tom's right. Technically, it probably wasn't all that groundbreaking... "they" did it before. But, still, it was light years ahead of everyone else. An aside, when I listen to shows nowadays, I still hear a lot of early 80's Garfield influence. Obvious tempo requirements aside, a lot of the fast & loud syncopated 16th note patterns mixed in between the drum ensemble seem to be a staple.

Yes, they were... because SOMEONE finally broke the west coast's complete and utter dominance of the activity, and it wasn't just a one year fluke. Not to take away anything from the corps (and the visual WAS groundbreaking... not sure how you could dispute that), but you could'a plugged in "your favorite non-west coast dc here" and a good portion of that glee would still have been present... regardless of show. Not a whine... I personally enjoyed the east/midwest/west rivalry and pseudo animosity.

Doubt they care much about the boos. They can handle it. 51-0 over the last two years. 75-2 over the last three, and .125 away from 4 titles in a row. Living well is the best revenge. Hope the staff keeps "sucking" as bad as they are right now. Despite the criticism (which came last year as well, and, to a lesser degree, '07), the staff is currently designing shows that puts the ball firmly in the performers court. Perform, win; don't, lose. Considering they outperformed yet lost to "better" shows in the past, can't ask for much more as a member. Congrats on #14. Looking forward to #15. Also, congrats to PR on drums. The little I could here over the line sounded tasty clean!

I don't buy the "performance placement" argument... gives judges less credit than they deserve. Bridgemen won drums in '82, after going on in the 9th slot. Did so after taking 2nd in prelim drums. The judges aren't idiots. They'll know full well going in who's in contention. Going on early is not going to stop a line from taking home the trophy. Put the performance out there, and you win. Don't, or someone else does, and you don't. Simple as that. Of course they'll leave some room, and it could lower scores across the board, depending on how many lines are in realistic contention. Yet, you could just as easily say that lines going on late are at a disadvantage if the early line has been winning consistently coming in. If it's difficult to consider reference given the performance placement spread, a judge is just as likely to give the nod to the line that's favored. Bottom line: leave it out there on the field, and you'll take it; don't, and you won't.

94 has been breached on about this date... 10 out'a the last 10 years. Probably goes back further (not gonna bother), and it's nowhere near a record.

Also of recap note: Crown's drumline was a real problem for 'em for a stretch, yet they've now beaten Cadets in drums two times in a row. Not routing for either of 'em to beat the other. Just obvious the Crown kids have put in some serious work to shore up a problem... it's showing on the sheets.

Devs beat Phantom in drums again... by Prosperie no less. Good sign for them considering that's the one area where, if a weakness exists, it usually starts to show. Interesting few weeks coming up.

Thanks, guys.

Did the Cadets have a problem in the Perc section tonight? Someone(s) fall? They got hammered in the Perc Tech sub-cap tonight... took 4th and beat Crossmen by a tenth.

Interestingly enough, I think whether or not someone can catch 'em will come down to the same things this year that it did in 2008: Percussion and Music Ensemble. BD was at or near the top in both, yet they tailed off in both down the stretch and that's how they got caught. IMO, no one will touch 'em in the visual captions. The amount of movement and speed in the visual program is ridiculous... absurd. They might get hit in the Music GE caption, but not by much. But, the Perc caption has hit 'em before... a number of times. Tail off in that and Music Ensemble as they have in the past, and they're catchable. Be interesting to see how the 2 Perc judge lineup scores 'em. Those two captions -- Perc and Music Ensemble -- will probably tell the story over the last three weeks. As such, I think it'll take someone that can score extremely well in both those captions as well as Music GE. So, I'm guessing Cavies and Coats are the only two with a shot... as it stands now.

Better is an abstract term which, in this context, can only be measured by the sheets. So far, every judge that's had a crack at them has asserted "yes." Yet, the spread is somewhat of a moot point. BD is winning by 2-3 points because they've designed to the sheets and they're executing; BD is winning because of the strength of the corps across the board. Put it this way, in terms of the caption that many seem to question -- GE Music, you could knock 'em down by a full point in GE Music Rep placing them just beneath Madison/Colts level, knock 'em down by a half point in GE Music Perf placing 'em down at BAC/BK levels, and they'd "still" be winning. That's strength across the board... in every individual section, in visual design, and in execution. The sheets need to allow for this type of show to occur. They need to allow for the '83 Cadets, the Stars, the early 2K Cavies, and the '09 and '10 BD's. Start trying to design the sheets to capture and factor in some type of tangible crowd enjoyment level, and you run down a slippery slope. You'll have the same problem you think you have now, just with different symptoms. There seems to be quite a range of show design out there, and it appears there's a lot to enjoy for everyone, regardless of their tastes. Seems like the sheets, if off, aren't that far off.

I'm curious what you thought was "jumbled up."

A sizable chunk of that Crown move up came in the Perc caption. They'll have to do the same this year. As it stands, they're sitting at least 7th in drums. Boston has beaten 'em a few times and more often than not lately. Problem for 'em in that caption comes when BK and SCV are added into the mix. BD & Phantom's additions won't change the ordinals from tonight since they'll be very close to or at 1 & 2. BK, on the other hand, has started to beat SCV in Perc consistently, and they handled Boston by a sizable chunk the other night. SCV, while a few tenths back from Crown the other night in Perc, actually tied 'em in Perc Musicality. It's not inconceivable that Crown could be looking at anywhere from 7th through 9th in Perc unless they handle the caption. BK and/or SCV hops 'em, and it'll be difficult to hold Cadets off who know how to push to the end and handle the GE caption. They handled the same caption last year, we'll see what happens this time around.