cixelsyd

Could you provide specific examples naming other directors and describing what they did to show their enthusiastic support for these proposals?

I would challenge that presumption. I imagine some people look back at the corps-style marching band movement of the 1970s-1980s, without any knowledge of what preceded it, and think of it as the "roots" of modern competitive marching band. That would be a misconception. Marching bands have had organized competition for at least as long as drum corps. The American Legion and VFW established contest divisions for marching band and drum corps simultaneously following World War I, and both senior and junior bands competed in the veterans events for decades. I have also seen news reports of high school marching band field contests drawing bands from all over the country as early as the 1920s. But to get back to the point - whether any of this is a "natural progression" - you already face a heavy debate there. In my opinion, the corps-style marching band movement was an unnatural progression, the result of a generation of marching music enthusiasts pursuing the path of least resistance in a world where scholastic band had considerable support from tax subsidation while drum corps did not. Even now, the one vocal advocate for turning DCI into marching band claims financial reasons as his motivation. If the drum corps activity actually did morph into marching band in that manner, that would be an unnatural progression as well.

Several misconceptions here. First, neither corps nor bands lead the way in design - people do. With that in mind... we went for many decades with bands and corps not copying each other. It was not even possible to do (muich less assess) on a large scale until the day when technology provided readily available recordings. Most impressions of what followed are colored by what limited exposure each of us had to the band activity in our own circles. Today we have 100 times as many competitive HS bands as DCI corps, and Internet access to much of their video; naturally, we tend to see more creditable design ideas on the band side today compared to 35 years ago, when there were ten times as many corps and fewer competitive bands. That does not mean that the Santa Clara Vanguard is making design decisions because of what Lawrence Central or Avon did last year.

Sorry, but I do not follow your logic. See, the reality of it is that even back when fuel was cheap and housing abundant, we had about 20 corps that were full while the rest, no matter how hard they worked at it, could not recruit quite that many people. Now, despite all the types of changes you point out having occurred in the interim, we still have about 20 full corps while the rest, no matter how hard they work at it, cannot quite recruit that same number of people. There is nothing to suggest that adding yet another wave of band instruments is going to change that reality. The number of kids participating in DCI is not a function of what instruments DCI corps use.

I think that has already been done, quite some time ago. Could you give an example of where DCI uses the word "bugle"? It is not in their name, not on the judging sheets, and not in colloquial usage among the people actually participating in the activity. Woodwinds are no more of a "natural progression" than us growing antlers. But okay, let us try to have a conversation. You mention marketing the activity to more people. Which people are we not currently marketing to? As previous posts indicate, the one group we definitely market to is scholastic bands, so that is a done deal. What other group are we unable to market to because of DCI not having woodwinds? As for becoming "more inclusive", please explain what problem that will solve. Nearly every DCI member corps is full, and turning away kids by the hundreds.

But we are getting different results. "The model" that has existed for as long as I can tell - half-crazed leaders herding bunches of half-crazed marchers across the country to compete in a nationwide championship with similar half-crazed organizations - has never been sustainable. Yet, here we are, a circuit full of corps with up to 80 years of unsustainable history behind them. Forty years ago, we created a governing agency (DCI) specifically to make things more sustainable - and that agency set about doubling down (quadrupling down?) on the very same touring and other costly components that you express concern over now. And yet, here we are, 40 corps who somehow manage a much lower attrition rate than past eras. Sure, if there were more corps, we would be helping more kids. We would also be entertaining more audiences, attracting more fans... in effect, "making more pie", as you say. I am all for that. To be honest, the smaller number of corps we have today has made it necessary to tour nationally in order to provide the drum corps experience for more than just a couple of weeks; therefore, the only way to really change the cost curve of touring is to grow more corps again.

Legacy fans are renewable too. We get new ones every year. (Think "ageouts".)

Where are the view setttings? If we cannot choose to hide avatars and sigs, it becomes impractical to visit DCP from a public setting (i.e. work).

If football is a revenue generator, then it should be self-supporting and thus not subject to suspension during government shutdowns.

If you think I said it "will", you are sadly mistaken.

I was wrong earlier. Maybe your flavor of choice is not sour after all. More like bitter. So Music City only made top 25 "for one day"? Was there a secret contest held late Friday night in the parking lot? Not only did I miss it, I cannot find the results anywhere. Who are the top 25 now? Meanwhile, I think you know the difference between what I said ("can attract new sponsors") and your spin ("will magically result in new sponsors"). Try not to twist the words of others - it tends to lead to thread closures.

You may be entitled to your opinion, but opinions are not "irrefutable". Maybe in your opinion, but evidently not in the opinion of the judges. The Oregon Crusaders did not take a season off. They have competed every season since they started as the Southern Oregon Crusaders in 2000. No argument there. Some world class units do the same. Not sure what your definition of "competitively successful" is. The only other corps you named were 7th Regiment and Raiders. In what way have those corps been more "competitively successful" than Music City? So only corps who "medal" are any good? Sounds like elitism to me. Yes, yes, and yes. So only corps "close to the top" are any good? Sounds like elitism to me. I guess you are entitled to your opinion. However, you are not entitled to express it in such a rude manner. I have seen all kinds of marching music ensembles over the years, from all over the globe. High school, college, all-age. Scholastic and independent. Honestly, of all the corps at DCI Championships this season, WC or OC, not one of them deserves the level of criticism you spew here. I can see just in a couple of viewings at shows that every single one of them has effective teachers, and good designers. Darwin was onto something with that "survival of the fittest" idea - the relatively few corps we have left in DCI have raised the bar on quality. If you still want to single out one such corps and criticize them relative to other corps... I get it, you like your grapes sour. But to personalize it by calling their instructors "very ineffective teaching staff" is just pointlessly off the rails.

And management deserves the chance to raise that money, before we cast final judgment. And it may be a situation where a corps grows a whole new base of funding support. They made top 25, after all. That level of success can attract new sponsors, better endorsement deals, and more tangible support from the fan base. As for the rest of your post... ... hard to assign credibility to an anonymous poster who rips on an entire teaching staff in this manner. How am I to believe you have inside information when you make comments like that?

Is football being cancelled as well?

My question, "what would they have?", was predicated on two concerns. If every non-Northeastern all-age corps decided to boycott Northeastern DCA events: a. What would they have for events? Would they organize their own nationwide championship event? Additional regional events? b. What would they have for membership? Are current corps members attracted by the habitual voyage to DCA Championships? Are potential members on the fence specifically because of the financial or time commitment involved in that trip? Saving money on the trip will do little good if there is no corps left to enjoy the savings. Was not expecting this idea to gather supporters, but if so... make a case for it by addressing these concerns.

And what would they have?

That is a shame. I prefer the sound of the marimba to the sound of a loudspeaker. It would not sound "terrible" up high. But it would sound different at the top of the stadium vs. down low - like everything else. Thing is, amplification cannot change that basic premise. If amplification is used to make things sound as desired at the top of the stadium, it will make things sound undesirable in the rest of the audience seating area.

Okay, I see. So the equipment trucks were filled at the pit size we had in 2002-2003, therefore we could not add more keyboards. But then how did we find space for the speakers and sound board? I am still not understanding you. Have you seen the 1983 Bridgemen drum feature? Have you seen Carolina Crown, either 2012 or 2013? No, wait a second. Any corps with a battery and a pit introduces a field spread wider than that of the pit alone. Is that not cleanable?

I do not understand. If this were true, corps would have stopped at one marimba and one vibraphone, especially now that we have amps. Which would make it truly exceptional to see the better corps pull it off... just like when they get nine snares to sound like one, or horns from goal line to goal line playing together.

I am sure that people from all parts of the country understand the challenges corps face in areas of lower population density and longer distances between corps. And I am sure that they are pulling for you guys to succeed despite those challenges. However, we cannot change geography. It may sound unsympathetic to acknowledge the uneven population distribution that makes all-age drum corps more practical in the Northeast, and just tell people from other regions to "deal with it". But you will still have to deal with it, no matter how many corps, shows or DCA Championship weekends are exported from the Northeast in the future. To be honest, when I hear numbers like $1,000+ per member, a part of me wishes corps would consider not making the trip. If the choice is between taking a 35-member corps to DCA Championships, or staying local and affordable and tripling your membership, I would choose the latter. I can only assume from recent behavior that the DCA Championship is an important draw for participants, since I do not see anyone staying home and tripling their membership in the process. As far as I am aware, corps members pay to participate in every corps with one possible recent exception (White Sabers). Well, about 50 years ago, senior corps pretty much lived in the Northeast and died everywhere else. As the veteran-centric activity faded, it became necessary for corps to run their own circuits, and the other regions lacked the critical mass to create the substantial activity that could be done in the Northeast. DCA was just one of several Northeastern circuits that happened to become the sole surviving all-age circuit. But there is no law saying all corps must do DCA. Midwestern senior corps ran their own circuit in the 60s and 70s, then joined forces with the regional junior circuit (Drum Corps Midwest) for the ensuing 25 years. You have options, depending on what current and prospective corps members in your area want. Does a regional circuit interest them, like the KS/AR/TX/CO idea you have mentioned before? Or are they so captivated by the concept of traveling to DCA Championships that they would raise the money to make it happen? Or do you have a substantial number of people who would become dedicated long-term participants, but cannot even meet the demands of regional travel? Your corps can opt to compete nationally, regionally, or just perform in exhibition locally, based on where the interest lies.

Then if people in other regions have not heard of the Bucs, adding the Bucs to the lineup will not draw any additional spectators. This rationale makes no sense. If, as you say, few people west of Ohio have heard of DCA, then it is the job of the show promoters to change that situation. That means we need more show hosts; we need those show hosts working harder to get the word out; and we need the DCA home office to consider what it can do to expand support to the show promotion effort nation/worldwide. I am not seeing how coaxing a NE corps into traveling out of region even belongs on that agenda. You would have us believe that the other regions, who only run 2 or 3 shows a season, are wondering why DCA is not particularly well known in their neighborhood? Build it, and they will come. Note that "build it" needs to happen first.

Interesting. My first instinct is that the corps experience teaches a more impressive lesson if members still have the temptation of mobile electronics on tour, but learn to use them in responsible moderation. On the other hand, the manner in which Cavalier members voted for their own cell phone policy shows another impressive lesson learned and put into practice.

You know, there is another option. Like every other instrument in drum corps, if you need more sound from it, use more of them. When corps found that 2 or 3 mellophones were not enough, they added more. They did not just tell the 2 or 3 players to play so loud it hurts... and they did not lobby for electronic amplification of mellophones.

Why not? Any corps that has the resources to set up a booth at a given show, and pay the going rate other vendors pay for booth space, ought to have that opportunity (space permitting). That exposes one of the limitations of release rules - a rule made by a circuit only applies to the corps in that circuit. Nothing stopping you from making the moves you described.

I said nothing about making rules. All I said is that in the context of a cooperative drum corps circuit, no corps should be using their ties with a band circuit to exclude other corps from engaging in free-market recruiting practices. Even the appearance of such impropriety ought to be avoided for the sake of preserving the kind of cooperative, sportsmanlike atmosphere this activity needs to have as one of its primary selling points. Back in the stone age, we had release rules because corps could not be trusted to refrain from raiding each other. We would still have such rules if not for modern day corps directors evolving to abide by some basic code of ethics. I am not affiliated with a particular corps, so I look at things with the perspective of wanting all corps to succeed, not just one. With that in mind, I have no objection to Cadets reaping the justifiable advantage that comes with running these band shows - receiving the going rate of pay from any other corps that sets up a booth at their shows.