cfirwin3

I watched it, but they didn't offer insight beyond the numbers.

Also would like to see the names associated with the split. Anyone have a link to that?

Whoa... I walk away for a few minutes and this thread took a turn and a half... I'll see myself out.

I will now.

Anyone know what time the voting is EST? Just trying to schedule when I should peek back here for the results and the initial explosi... I mean... commentary.

It was the adoption of the label of "marching arts" that lead us here. The format is just catching up to the label. The label was always dumb... As if drumcorps needed to be justified to some intellectual group out there.

We call this... "Grasping at Straws" Or in this case... "Grasping at Reeds".

Same. I will likely be much more casual about it all.

Because it really is arbitration... based on mood and current ticket sales and show designs, etc. Making a leap from a platform that isn't really quite there is not only risky, but it is also unwarranted. There's no sense in letting the market decide poorly while the market is relatively favorable with small steps.

They definitely learned a lot in 01 that shifted the gears in 02. No doubt. That's how it has gone for them since.

I dunno... I'm not sure that we can really say that a painting with more color has a greater opportunity for artistic development than a painting with primary colors only. I'm not sure (more to the point here) that a symphony orchestra has more opportunity for artistic development than a woodwind quintet. Sure there is more of a pallet there, which merely gives more opportunity for something... a wider palette of sound and experimentation perhaps. But I don't know that I would quantify artistic development by the size of the available palette. Idiomatic music can develop to infinite places within its idiom. I think that's why some of the justification for electronics gets people (rightly) bent out of shape. Some of the justification given isn't really logical or honest.

I think I just said that "'00 was an intentional redemption for the organization.". Just note that there is a pretty big leap between the '00 and '01 years both in placement and in observable design. I'm not sure that we have any disagreement here.

I agree, if you can synthesize any instrument (particularly by sampling it) then you should be able to play any instrument... but for the bounds of the idiom as "they" see fit (which might be TRADITIONal, but that's not necessarily a wrong basis when points are involved, as they are). Right now, the drumcorps idiom in DCI is Brass, Percussion and a variety of electronic (which is a super broad category) coloring. Making that leap to other wind instruments changes the idiom... which isn't necessarily wrong, but it certainly would make Drum and Bugle corps Marching Band as per the AI proposal. The Bluecoats proposal could actually do a very limited similar thing by justifying that a non-brass or percussion instrument could be live sampled. But this more obscure interpretation doesn't seem to involve the addition of full sections of instruments, but rather just the effect of processing acoustic sounds into something new. Where and why do you draw the line(s)? Do you limit synthesis to only wave form sythesis... excluding samples? Can you do that and still allow an electric guitar (which is an amplified string and functionally no different than a violin with a pick-up)? It's all arbitrary and bound by a voting body. Nothing wrong with that. They are trying to balance their creative interests and the proverbial sacred cows of the fans (which sometimes align and sometimes do not).

That's what the live sampling requests are about. Hey!... maybe the Bluecoats have a 'freind' in this AI request. I mean c'mon... live sampling a real and present snow mobile... I'd pay to see and hear that... once.

My comment was more to the ongoing assumption that this is about adding sideline woodwinds... it isn't This is about converting the activity to marching band (as per the premise of the change as it has been given).

That proposal is not about sideline solos. It is about integrating whole sections because the premise of the (bad) logic is 'inclusion'. But the proposal does not address overall corps size... so (in my opinion) it is merely just a bunch of... ummm... I'll call it... "woodwind wokeness" talk. Adding 1 sideline bassoonist is not inclusion as it is described in the proposal.

I don't know how it's all going to come out in the end... but I do know that 1 request essentially for the inclusion of woodwinds by an administrative figure (and relative outsider) and 2 requests for sound reinforcement limitations by insiders are not terribly compatible concepts. I also know that the request for woodwinds as an inclusive measure has a major flaw in logic that everybody can see and many have pointed out. So... there's that. I'm also extremely curious about what kind of voodoo the Bluecoats are after with that one... I think I'd like to hear that (but then again, there are 2 calls for limitations on the most basic premise of electronics on the field).

Look at the change in positions and scoring starting with 01. Note the changes in staff thereafter. Winning a championship started in 01 and staff changes pressed on thereafter. I don't want to name names, but everybody knows that Rarick's movement was a necessary change. You seem to be suggesting that the changes that I am speaking about are ALL much more recent, but they aren't. So... no, you aren't calling me out on anything. '00 was an intentional redemption for the organization. Then everything changed for the Bluecoats in 01 with that show design and a focus on designing and teaching a competitive climb. Then the action started right away in 02 and following with gradual serious staff adjustments in various sections that needed attention (percussion being one and visual -design- being the biggest).

I could go for an omelet, myself.

The Bluecoats didn't move placements with electronics until they hired new visual design staff, new percussion staff and expanded their brass staff. Doug also started writing more technically contending music. Not all of this happened at once. They were still pulling middle of the pack placements with their electronic innovations. It's all the other stuff that made the placement difference.

That's quite an extreme hypothetical to require. I don't think most corps have spent more than the Bluecoats on electronics. But they don't exactly hold a bunch of titles. It's a theory in search of an example.

Neither is a DCI drumcorps. Name it.

But then we are conflating abnormalities with normalcy. It's arguing an exception as the rule. Having a surprise failure of a truck or an equipment storage fire and asking for help is not an example of living beyond of one's means. I could put an addition on my house with a new patio and hot tub (well within my means)... and then have a 50 year weather event destroy it. I'm not exemplifying living outside my means when insurance only gets me 70 percent whole. I could also use heath scares as an example but that may hit close to home for some so I'll just offer the concept up generally.

We can't conflate paying for emergencies that extend beyond reserves with normal operation. Nothing about that is normal. Do you know of some corps that has abnormal emergencies... normally? Normal email blasts are not for last minute cash. They are a small part of solicitation beyond other fundraising schemes. Haven't you ever watched PBS? 😀

It depends... on how it is actually being 'hinted at' Merely recognizing the programming effect of an electronic element is not at all suggesting its necessity to score well any more than giving the same recognition to the treatment of a musical phrase is suggesting that playing a specific style or genre is necessary to score well. Credit for something there doesn't mean that it must be there for credit. Credit could be given for something completely different. (this is where we start a brawl over the subjectivity of it all) Perhaps it is being 'hinted at' in other ways?