cixelsyd

It is tempting to think that if the same pie was cut in fewer slices, each (remaining) corps would be better fed. But it would not be the same size pie. We already have so few corps that it is becoming difficult to stitch together a logistically practical tour and provide full lineups at all shows. Some tour event partners simply cannot continue hosting shows as a result, while we are starting to see an occasional TEP go forward anyway with a slate of 3 or 4 competitors. With any fewer corps and even less shows, touring corps will no longer be able to book the same number of shows in their schedules. If you think Glassmen have it tough right now, taking away 5 of their paydays will make matters even worse. The pie gets smaller. Taking a macroeconomic view, a large component of the drum corps fan base is participation based. Less corps means less participants, and less family and friends of participants, which leads to less purchases and donations from those people. The pie shrinks again.

Touring is not mandatory. Maybe it looks that way, from the number of corps that tour 7 or 8 weeks now. But the DCI prescribed "full tour" starts in San Antonio, and even that is not mandatory. Corps such as Pacific Crest, Academy and Jersey Surf have done world class with less touring. And for even shorter tours, open class provides other options.

So far, it sounds more like a simple lack of publicity. The corps is making the effort to establish a local presence through these performances, as well as hosting one or two shows in the Toledo area each summer. Maybe they just need more help getting the word out.

Yes, corps generally need to conduct their own fundraisers which, combined with donations, must fill that gap. When I look at the $550,000 number Glassmen are quoting, I am thinking that might not include any such external fundraising (consistent with their testimony that external fundraising efforts have been unsuccessful lately). Often, these corps survive by living within their means - developing innovative ways to keep expenses below the world class norm. Conversely, innovative ways to generate more revenue can be just as helpful if you find any. In any case, the field is tilted in favor of the winners. Some of this is natural and unavoidable. Winners will generally sell more souvies than lower placing corps. But there are many other ways in which top DCI corps are given additional, unnecessary advantages. Did you know that top corps get preferential souvie stand positioning at major shows? Appearance fees, from what I have heard, are the same for all world class corps. However, that is only part of the money corps receive from DCI. An even larger amount is paid out post-season as revenue sharing, divided by a formula heavily weighted by competitive placement in both the current season and past seasons. That will never happen. I think if the general public knew precisely how much revenue shares favor the top corps, there would be rioting in the streets. We do see patterns already. Over the years, we have heard stories of corps at all levels having financial crises and questionable management decisions. Through that all, how many corps placing in the top half of world class have folded, or even taken a year off? Zero. Now, how many in the bottom half of world class? Yes, it would. But it appears that some directors of top corps do not want the activity to be more competitive.

That analysis suggests that if a corps cut back the most travel intensive part of their tour (where a 25% reduction in days on the road netted more than 25% reduction in fuel costs), they would achieve some savings. Please continue. No, really - continue. Tell us where this additional revenue is. That would solve everything.

What if your personal agenda is balancing drum corps budgets? Not everything being said here is a personal agenda. I suggest, in this context, that a corps may need to cut costs to balance their budget, and that generally, DCI may need to consider rule and policy changes that lower the cost of competing at the highest levels. Costs have increased as the equipment has evolved. Personally, I like some of those changes - but if drum corps cannot afford them, something has to give. Of course, travel and touring costs have also increased over time, so maybe those costs can be reduced instead.

Randy - Thank you for sharing your insights here. This is a conversation that needs to take place. I am with you so far. I am still with you - but feel there is one thing to clarify. Drum corps has never had a true business model, because drum corps is not a pure business. All through history, people have been drawn into drum corps competition at least partly because of the competitive angle - the chance to become one of the best, or champion, of their class/circuit/state/nation/world. That competitive drive causes people to devote their time, energy and money (remember that part) to the pursuit. Like any other amateur sport, part of the battle is waged away from the contest field, where funds must be raised to cover the expenses of preparing your team to compete with other similarly funded teams. The business model of a drum corps circuit, like that of amateur sports, must therefore account for the fact that their role is to provide as level a playing field as possible for their sport. A governing body like DCI cannot stop some corps from out-fundraising others, but it can define the nature of the activity so that it focuses on the participants and not on ever-increasing equipment, travel and other costs. No doubt, looking to those examples will prove useful - selectively. These leagues have interesting ideas for funding and promotion, some of which have already come into use among enterprising corps such as the one you worked with. But while drum corps may be the major league of marching music, that does not mean it has the ability to become as self-sustaining as the major leagues you name above. One advantage the individual drum corps has is the ability to cut their costs to fit their budget. A team in a sports league may already have their travel schedule dictated to them by the league. A drum corps has some flexibility in choosing where to travel, how to travel, and how long to stay on the road. I hope corps like the Glassmen look at all their options on both the revenue and cost side of their budget as they go forward.

They are now. The Renegades owe themselves an explanation. Otherwise, the corps reputation will remain as "that corps that did something so hideous that DCA suspended them for a whole season". How can a corps operate successfully with that black cloud hanging over them? Evidently, that is why the plan was to handle the suspension without a public announcement. Now that this plan is no longer an option, it is becoming increasingly obvious that the Renegades need to take ownership of their own reputation, and become the highly visible role model for not-doing-whatever-it-was-that-they-allegedly-did-at-DCA-2012.

Perhaps they have the permission of the copyright holder. That is your defense? You saw it on YouTube, so it must be OK?

I would think that for audio and video, whoever records the material takes copyright of it, and whoever sells the product secures the licensing for that product. Recordings of DCI events, therefore, would be DCI's property, while footage from other events or behind the scenes usually belongs to the corps. DCI then gives each corps permission to use DCI recordings of themselves, and in those cases, both DCI and the individual corps end up obtaining mechanical, synchronization or streaming licensing for the same material.

When I said "rights", I was thinking of both performance and recordings thereof. Since the Cadets produce so much of their own audio and video, they need the same rights as DCI.

Until the CDs/DVDs are in our hands, we do not know which is the bigger impact now, do we? Usually, it is a simple yes or no. There is one murky area, though, which you are about to mention here. As others have pointed out, fair use is not clearly defined. Regardless, it seems like you are disputing the wisdom of treating pre-recorded sound clips and samples with the same rigor as arranged music. I do not see any corps throwing a new song into their arranged repertoire in late July for which they lack rights. Do you object to corps being just as responsible with their use of pre-recorded sounds?

Thousands of musical selections have been arranged and performed by DCI corps without incident. I may be prone to getting things backwards, but this is not one of those cases. I do not think it is wise for individual corps to be deviating from DCI licensing policies in that manner. Not exactly. It is also about rights, which are not measured solely in dollars. If they were, the entire world of youth music would have a much easier time of it.

Not sure what you are getting at. I imagine the peak attendance at a DCA was probably in the distant past. But if we could see the attendance numbers for championship weekends through the years, we might find that recent attendance (once one adds up I&E, minicorps, prelims, the alumni show, and finals) shows some growth. If you have a particular criticism to discuss, you may need to be more specific. DCA has developed numerous strategies. Some I agree with, some I do not. There has been some success (growth since the 13 corps of 1993), and some concern (no growth since the 26 corps of 2005). But DCA has certainly done more than just shuffling the deck chairs on the Titanic.

Does it matter if corps A merely plays a pre-recorded, professionally mastered soundtrack for their whole show, with no live performers? It sounds like you would be OK with that, as long as they sound better than corps B with their horns and drums. I am siding with Mr. Peashey on this issue.

My reactions, if what both of you are saying is true - - That is a design failure. - If these sound clips are really as vital to the show as the music the kids actually perform, then the sound clips should undergo the same rigor as the music arrangements. They should be conceived at the same time the rest of the program is thought up, created at the same time the music is arranged, and rights should be pursued at the same time as permission to arrange and perform the music of the show proper. Times have changed, and designers must change with them. You cannot just take the intellectual property of others on a whim, throw it into your show in late July, and perform it verbatim at DCI contests without the permission of the owner.

But they also place microphones directly in front of the speakers, wherever they might be for each corps.

I think I follow you. You are suggesting that the corps sound board be hardwired to the recording mix. That sounds like an interesting idea that corps might want to experiment with for their own recordings. However, that would not be appropriate for recordings of competitive performances. In my opinion, drum corps contest recordings should capture sounds as accurately as possible, as they are presented in the live venue (like you say in your first paragraph).

Tax exemption is not the same thing as public funding. If it was, you could complain about how I decorate inside my house, as long as I claim a tax deduction for mortgage interest.

Gasp! The Civil War? I can see it now - HS band forced to remove grey from their "The Blue and the Grey" show.

But they also want to present that show on CDs, DVDs, Blu-Rays, and streaming media. Therefore, I would think the Cadets (or any corps) would prefer to create a show for which all pertinent rights can be obtained.

By getting started as far in advance as necessary to obtain the required licensing. Evidently, the use of electronic samples has gotten out of control - in several ways. If rights to voice samples are going to have the same impact on audio and video products as music rights, then they should be subject to the same policies. Also, DCI and the corps should look into developing an even more proactive approach to identifying these issues. Not much you can do about licensing problems when you discover them in the fall. Issues that impact audio and video need to be flagged before finals night. If they were, the Cadets could have altered their design to remove the voice segments, or recorded their own instead of copying existing soundtracks. (And what happened to fair use?)

If you are referring to 1976, they brought back several songs they had played in 1975, and added one from the public domain. They would have had more trouble licensing the original show.

Fun topic. Unless DCI judges suddenly form a union, though, this discussion will be purely hypothetical. I think if the current DCI judges actually went on strike, replacement judges would be obtained so that the DCI season could proceed. There should be enough capable people available, as there are dozens of marching band and winter guard/percussion circuits. With an entire set of new faces and fresh opinions, early-season contest results in the strike season would have a few surprises. Results would not be as predictably consistent from night to night. Inevitably, whichever groups feel wronged by those outcomes would start complaining - and by that, I do not mean complaining here on DCP. They would complain through official channels, lobby to remove judges that deviate from the norm, and put pressure on leadership to provide consistency, just as corps staffs have been doing for the past 30-40 years. In all likelihood, the DCI judging administrator (even if he is a strike replacement himself) will feel compelled to respond to the demands of the corps (his employers), and pass that message along to the judges in a variety of ways. Not sure exactly how quickly the process would happen, but I would expect that by the start of the following season, the "problems" would be "fixed", and judging would once again have that familiar "consistency" (slotting) expected from DCI. That first season sure would be fun, though.

Then maybe he should reconsider referring to placements 7-12 as the bottom 6. What would placements 13-22 be in his context?