kksop17

I'm sorry, but there is an awful lot of whining in this thread. "Awwww the kids are going to feel bad.....awwww they work so hard". How do you think the kids in Div III feel when they play a stadium filled with crickets at their finals? How do you think the bottom corps feel when they play a show and no one applauds? That's life. Get used to it.

Further, I feel that yes, people put in hardwork. Booing isn't a reflection of how people feel about that hardwork. It isn't a reflection of how people feel about these kids. It is a reflection of how people feel about HOPKINS. Granted, it's somewhat akin to the difference between "boo burns" and "boo urns", but hey, you cna't win em all right.

No offense, But if you can't stand the heat get the #### out of the kitchen. Seriously. If you didn't know that there was a good chance that people wouldn't like your show when you signed up to march cadets because your director has gone against what many people believe drum corps is you're pretty much a moron. I don't care how much hardwork and effort goes into a show. We're allowed to cheer, we're also allowed to boo. If these kids don't like it they'll march somewhere else. The fans are allowed to express their opinion of a style, a director, or a corps. If the kids aren't tough enough to withstand a little booing they shouldn't be marching corps in the first place. WE baby the #### out of our kids these days. A little negative feedback isn't going to make or break anyone's life. This conduct isn't despicable, it's simply an expression of how many fans feel about the current direction the cadets are taking. if they don't like it, well, there's always BLAST. PEACE

So I was thinking about this as I was reading yet another "Why is drum corps becoming more like band" post. I started to think, would a retro show work? Say a corps brought back some of the signature features of different eras of drum corps (perhaps this has already been done??) and used them in a show, or focussed on one particular era. They would bring back everything (uniforms, no amps, brass only, no narration) etc. Would the crowds approve? Or no? Would it be impossible to compete in this day and age while paying tribute to the "good ol days" where corps wasn't marching band and we all laughed at the bandos? Cheers,

Well, Requiring people to march in a place they "don't want to" isn't a realistic solution. However, if there were a regional circuit created which was affordable, and allowed kids to WORK while they marched then perhaps they would consider "cutting their teeth" in a lower corps before progressing to a top corps. So you're a rook-out? Well, that's a #### shame. I honestly doubt that anyone who actually REALLY wanted to march corps would skip their only opportunity to do so simply because they weren't allowed to do so. Furthermore, I think most people here can remember a time when the rules were significantly different. Now, these rules are common place and aren't even questioned by today's marching members. This rule would take two-three years to become just another part of DCI. The key issue which affects DCI as a whole, across all fronts is parity. No offense to the bottom corps (I marched one) but the fans are showing up to see the top six at most shows. Lay fans are especially turned off by poor playing, drill, or execution. The lack of parity in DCI creates problems on all fronts. From a marketing standpoint it's hard to sell tickets in an evironment where there is either no, or one big corps coming to town. If all corps were moderately equal then marketing the corps would become significantly easier (and shows). Total financial parity would also help. I believe that all corps should pay a certain percentage of their intake into a fund that would help to stablize all corps during hard financial times. This fund could be run as an endowment for DCI. I also think that DCI, in conjunction with the corps, members, etc, should work to establish an endowment fund to ensure the future of DCI. The issue is that only the top 6 corps have enough pull to fill their corps every year. The bottom corps ALWAYS struggle to find enough marching members. The competitive system is seriously dysfunctional. I beleive the scoring system works but it's vastly tilted towards keeping the top corps on top, and the bottom corps on the bottom. With parity in most of the major sports leagues also came a (shocker) increase in viewership and fan participation (also a shocker). Perhaps DCI should learn from these leagues. I do not believe that forcing someone to march somewhere they don't want to march will help. However, if we could make most corps equally desireable as a place to march perhaps kids wouldn't be spending thousands to fly across the country and march BD? I also think establishing a regional show alliance would aid in marketing. For instance when a big musical act comes to a state (or province) all of their concert dates are advertised on the radio. Aka, if a band is playing Toronto, Montreal, Ottawa, all of those dates are aired on the radio stations sponsoring said concert. Perhaps DCI could invest in similar radio advertising with show sponsors. Especially with shows in states where there is a regional. Perhaps split the cost with show organizers? Aka, advertise all the dates leading up to the regional and the regional itself. Anyway, this post is terribly structured and mostly just a jumble of thoughts I've had over the past few weeks. Really, I think the only way for DCI to move forward as an activity and organization is to achieve some form of meaningful competitive parity. Until then, DCI will only appeal to a limited market, and the overall number of corps/participation in corps will continue to dwindle.

Well, I haven't bothered to read all 9 pages of this debate but I'll weigh in with my opinion, which is backed by absolutely no fact, just my own personal conjecture. 1.) Drum Corps actually seems like a microcosm of the real world right now. Everytime we add an additional layer of complexity we limit who can start up another DBC. Additionally, adding new intrumentation means that there will continue to be a growing performance gap between top and bottom. While some may argue that this doesn't matter or won't happen it's fairly hard to see how adding new instruments to DBC won't increase the costs of doing business. These costs are limiting for the activity because new corps won't be able to start up (can't compete) and old corps, especially those already in a precarious situation will have a hard time with the new requirements. I believe that we are at a relatively precarious point in the activities history. The Costs of running a DBC are skyrocketing. Especially fuel, insurance, instrumentation etc. I don't think anyone can remember the last time that we had a year where all top corps hit the field in sound financial terms. Perhaps instead of seek to continuously change and grow we should focus on consolidation and excellence for a few years. Allow corps to grow into themselves, put DCI money into the stability of the activity and just ensure that there is, in fact, a tommorow. We don't need to change rapidly to be relevant. We do need to be able to hit the field every year to have an activity. 2.) Tradition: I think that tradition can't be extreme, but one must honour the roots of an activity. I have some problem with the amping of a pit, but I understand it's necessity. I understand that there have been changes over the course of Drum and Bugle Corps history. However, I'd like to see the activity remain Drums and Bugles. Why? Well, mainly because I think it sounds cool. Maybe we are limiting artistic creativity. Or conversely, perhaps were forcing show designers and performers to be more creative. I say this because it's easy to be creative in a vast medium with tons of tones, instruments and colours. I think it's actually harder to come up with a brilliant show in this environment. Is this good or bad? I'm not entirely sure. Personally, I'm more impressed when I see something wicked happen in a limited medium than I am by a show or art form which has access to all the resources they want. 3.) Uniqueness: I think it's important for Drum and Bugle Corps to keep some aspects of the activity unique. I don't believe in standardization (ex. becoming more like a marching band). I think most marching members don't want to add electronic instruments, woodwinds, or whatever. In fact, most of the people Iknow who marched/are marching enjoy the activity as it is. It's cool when you hear a unique ensemble sounds; it catches your attention. This is an important aspect of the activity and perhaps should remain as such. Anyway, I beleive that it's important to allow the activity, fans, and participants time to adapt to rule changes. Making major additions every year is not required, nor is it even good business.

Not that I know much about getting a corps off the ground (or anything), but I'd venture to say that in Today's world if a Canadian corps had a unique style and identity, as well as solid management and funding it wouldn't be much different to attract members here than in the states. I suspect the real issue behind attracting members is funding and ability to actively recruit at Marching Band Contests. With a proper recruiting budget it could be done. That being said, I doubt it would be fun/easy. I've frankly always thought that there was room for a top DBC to be sponsored by MLSE (Maple Lead Sports and Entertainment, for those not from the TO area). Essentially the corps (and associated staff/members/whatever) would perform during MLSE events in the winter as another form of entertainment, do some shows etc during J's games, Leafs games, whatever, in return for an intitial grant or yearly funding. Given that MLSE owns a variety of different sports teams and the support that DBC could likely garner around the TO area if marketed properly it would probably be feasible with a few tweaks (aka, getting staff to also perform during the intial period). I'd venture to say that any corps that is really committed can make it to the top. It just takes time, money and effort. All of which most people are fairly short on.

I can't remember were it was..... but needless to say we stayed in a few schools that had a substantial number of roaches in them. A few crazy grasshopper stories from texas (not scorpions....).

Yes, I understand that. My point was simply that the experiment was rigged from the beginning.

This is interesting; but it doesn't really prove anything. I listen to classical music somewhat regularly and I just don't stop for people on the street regardless of who they might be. Whoever said that images need context is absolutely correct. This is the principle behind sites like amazon.com, itunes, or whatever. In order for these sites to work you need a context fo what you are about to use (aka a starting point so you can comprehend what's going on). For instance, say you buy "DCI World Championship DVD's 2006" (hypothetically) from Amazon.com. The site obviously recognizes that you've bought this, and reccomends what other people have also bought who made the same initial purchase that you did. This leads you down into the content, farther and farther until say you find a particular recording of a corps that you really like. However, without that initial frame of reference you never would have found the other content. This principle is outlined in "The Long Tail" which is a book by the editor of wired magazine. It's a fairly proven psychological concept that people need a frame of reference or context to be able to truly understand waht they are witnessing. If he hadn't of been in a busy, dirty, subway stop, and say in a park where people aren't commuting and perhaps had a sign identifying who he was far more people would have stopped because they now would ahve had context for what they were hearing. This really has nothing to do with "beauty" at all, and more to do with simple social psychology.

Actually it'll probably stop once this threat gets pushed off the bottom of the page..... but then again... someone might bump it back up again. haha. bump.

I don't think anyone here has been advocating for loudness over intonation and tuning. As I mentioned in my post; no one wants to here 64 brass players blow the #### out of their horns and have it sound like crap. That being said; am I willing to sacrafice some musicality at certain points in the show to have my face blown off? Yes. Do I expect the hornline to overblow their instruments as a whole, get a screeching, out of tune, ##### sound. No. However, I don't think it's that absolute. I don't think it's a question of 64 brass players valuing dB over tone. Or Brass caption heads for that matter. Everyone on this board consistently tries to make things as black and white as possible. Life, Drum Corps and virtually everything else simply isn't like this. It's not a question of 64 players playing with ##### intonation for volume (at least not anymore). It is a question of reaching that edge and excitement that is supposed to permeate the drum corps activity. Please read this line carefully before replying with more black and white intonation crap. I do not advocate for overblowing, poor intonation, lack of matching within a hornline. I do not advocate for playing without musicality. However, in an 11.5 minute show am I willing to have numerous loud impacts where the tone isn't matched perfectly, or the sound isn't totally uniform? Yes, absolutely. Especially if it's that much louder than if the corps stayed well within it's limits. Am I willing to listen to a fully ##### hornline just trying to play loud? No. I agree with your point that everything can be done at once; I am not advocating from the camp of "sacrafice everything in the name of volume." However,I am advocating for hornlines that aren't afraid to push the limites of their musicality. I believe that tone must come before volume; but if you are all relatively close in tone and tuning.... let is loose. Overblow a bit sometimes. Blow the face off the crowd. Should this be done all the time? No.

Who keeps voting for Mellophone? Terrible choice.

After reading about 24 pages of seemingly inane, incredibly circular debate it seems that this subject really comes down tot he fundamental question of expectations. When certain members go to a Drum Corps Show they expect to hear "LOUD". Aka, blow your face off loud, with decent intonation, good tuning, and relatively matched sounds. Does this mean that they NEED to hear perfect intonation, perfect matching, perfect tuning? No, not likely. Their expectation for a Drum Corps show is an impressive, loud, showy, drum corps show. For others they expect to hear a musical ensemble, playing well within it's limits with near perfect intonation, matching and tuning. This is all great and well. Are the two mutually exclusive? No, not really. No one wants to hear a low quality brass line blow the crap out of its horns. No one. Maybe it's loud... but who cares.... However, would many of us on this board sacrafice some matching, edginess, tuning etc for several more decibels in volume? Probably. These units are not playing in a concert hall where the temperature, acoustics, and ensemble sound are all very carefully controlled. They are playing on a buggy, outdoor, football field (most of the time) where the temperature changes over the course of the night, the field conditions change, etc. It will never be perfect outdoor. Not to mention that many of them are running at 200+ beats per minute and their average age is usually about 19. I believe that Drum Corps should be loud. Not at the cost of intonation, tuning, etc. However, would I take one edgey player over and 130+dB hornline over perfect matching and a 100dB hornline? Yes. My expectation when I go to see the CSO, TSO, BSO is far different than when I see phantom. I don't go to hear Kenny Chesney and complain that it wasn't Metallica. I expect two different things from both of those shows. Those are different musical styles and should be treated as such. Drum Corps isn't a symphony, concert band or anything else. It's drum corps. It's original intention wasn't to be a concert band with great tone. It is a military institution.

I would say that veterans are given priority. Say until the end of September or whatever to declare formally their intention to return and after that their spot is forfeit. Many organizations operate in this fashion; vets have a certain amount of time to declare their loyalty etc to an organization and then after that their assets/spot/whatever is opened up to the general public. After that period of time the corps can audition say 300 people for the remaining spots or a figure like 3 people for every remaining spot. The system is fairly complex but it would limit corps from having relatively "massive audition camps". Hopefully it would help to create some form of parity.