mn trumpter guy

That second one became the 07/08/09 drum major uniform (except white plumes instead of blue). I like the first one! Maybe they thought it was too bland? It is very stately, but lacks the 'pizzaz' of some of the other uniforms.

I understand what you are saying- and agree. But I don't know anyone who has been able to explain to me the "artistic ideas" in BD's show this year. I forget who, but someone on DCP stated: "The emperor is naked." Do the judges truly understand what BD is doing? Or are they assuming there is a good reason behind it because they are who they are? I honestly don't know- this was actually the first BD show in a long time that I could watch without shaking my head in frustration; I just am curious as to if BD is getting benefit of the doubt that other corps don't have. Which sounds more accusatory than I mean to be, but I don't know how else to phrase it.

This :thumbup: Is exactly what I think some designers have lost track of. I feel like a lot of designers focus on creating "cool moments" because they think that it will be effective. What is effective (to me) is putting together a cohesive, effective PROGRAM. A program, in my opinion, is not the sum of its parts; it is a whole. A string of cool moments does not a cool show make. If I like this, that, and that, but hate everything in between, I probably won't like the show.

But we still have to recognize the difficulty- even if it doesn't look difficult. Nothing the people in "Blast!" did was made to look difficult by them- but it still was. I'm with you... but I don't think we can discount 'degree of difficulty' completely- I don't want to watch people perform something that is effective but easy. I want to be impressed not only by the effect, but by the difficulty. I don't want to see "hard but dirty & not effective," and instead want to see "effective and clean." Eh... not so fast. I don't care how clean it is: 8 to 5 across a field playing "Cross Hot Buns" is not nearly as effective as dirtier 4 to 5 across the field playing "Festive Overture." I know you probably don't mean that- you probably mean that a show dirty is less effective than the same show, but clean. Just wanted to make sure. EDIT: for spelling.

You did indeed say that, and I agree; BD are masters at finding that line. What would be very interesting- though it will not and should not happen- would be for the top 12 to all learn the same show. That would really be the only way for content to play no role at all in the competition. And I completely agree with your analysis; I am probably still jaded a bit because my corps followed the Crown/Cadets approach of "here's a really hard show, please give us credit." and I hated seeing shows that (I thought) were 'easier' than mine beat me. I am extremely competitive, though

I would argue that spending less is always more reliable than thinking you will make more; until a business plan has been proven, isn't it better to be cautious with your money? What may be happening at the G7 level is: the amount of crap (read: electronics, props, etc.) that they are buying right now IS with conservative spending, and they expect to be able to spend much more with all the new income from the G7 concept. In the end, I guess it comes down to the fact that the G7 corps truly only care about themselves, which I understand, but if their plan is to bankrupt other corps, then I think there is a problem with that. It's one thing to work on making yourself more fiscally stable, but you shouldn't be doing that at the expense of someone else. One of the things I thought was coolest about when I marched was the fact that even though me and my team were in vicious competition with groups around us, when we got out of uniform and off the field, we understood that we were all doing the same thing, and that was cool. Maybe the directors of DCI should have some kind of team-building retreat and stop trying to screw each other over. But now we're getting into the discussion Kevin and ciselyd are having. Yes, everyone is certainly working hard- I won't disagree with that. I'll also agree that the corps you list have earned the success they have attained. However, I would guess that performance order has an impact on who gets a higher score. I would also argue that by paying the winning corps more money, you enable them to win again, and give them an advantage of more money over the other cocrps. In THAT way, I think DCI absolutely influences who the 'headliners' are; if you win once and get paid more, it's easier to win again. As one of my friends says often: follow the money.

Yes that much seems obvious. I would still argue that they should be looking to spend less; clearly making more isn't really an option. My last question still stands: Does DCI have some program trying to figure out the financial mess beyond simply 'generate more cash.' Just in case that idea doesn't pan out. Is ANYONE trying to find a different solution?

Honest question: How does that sound 'naive'? I could see a bevy of other words being used to describe that, but 'naive' is not one of them. In no way does that reasoning imply an immaturity or innocence of thought. In the past, he has agreed with the judges, and the public, in general, was not up in arms about the way results were reported. Now they are. Something clearly has changed. People don't hate the winner solely because they win; not in the magnitude of people's discontent with the Blue Devils winning. And just to avoid any accusations or thoughts; I have not problem with BD winning this year. I may not agree, but I understand and accept.

That is exactly the part I had in mind. I know some people get tired of corps staying in their 'wheelhouse,' but I rather like Troop's. I was much let down by their show this year...

I know you aren't ignoring this: but it would be extremely easy for a corps to clean a show where they do nothing but march 8 to 5 at 140 BPM, playing children's songs. Are you suggesting that a perfectly performed show I've described above should win over a dirty "For the Common Good," "Spartacus," or "Phenomenon of Cool" ? I hope not. I understand and agree: judges shouldn't judge if they "like" a show, but it should be taken into account that a corps is attempting something difficult. Theoretically, shouldn't the 'content' score stay more or less the same from show to show, barring re-writes, additions, etc.? And if so, do they? I haven't been keeping track, but I suspect they change as often as the execution score.

His suggestions were all good, in my opinion. They were simply suggestions in how he thinks a show should be shown, from a camera point of view. As in "If the drill is exciting, please show the drill." That doesn't take a degree in anything to figure out. Not that I'm not impressed with your knowledge, but the fact that Pete doesn't have your experience does not invalidate his statements. You don't have to know anything about equipment to know that if something important is happening here, then you darn well show what is happening here. Secondly; If Tom Blair is in charge of running things, and people are dissatisfied with the product he puts out, then maybe he doesn't know what he is doing. Are the broadcasts and DVD's perfect? Heck no! Are they terrible? Heck no! But there's room for improvement. I mean no personal insult to Mr. Blair, nor anyone else involved with the productions DCI puts out, but knowing what you are doing, and being able to do it properly are two very different things. For instance: I teach bands. I know how to make a band sound good. Do I always execute that in the best possible way? HECK NO I DO NOT. I know this; so I'm always looking for ways to improve. In fact I submit that if Mr. Blair knows what he is doing to the point you suggest, he is eager to hear people's thoughts and concerns. If he knows what he is doing, then he will know what is a good suggestion, and what to ignore. Forgive me if I am too harsh: I think you are getting defensive of video production crews unnecessarily. We are not here to criticize for the sake of tearing someone or something down; we're here to offer our thoughts and suggestions on how a product may be improved.

I was wondering what the term for that was (I assumed there was one). It seems like what the G7 should be doing is finding ways to spend less... not make more. Then again, once someone has a toy it's hard for them to give it up. But think of how much money could be saved just by eliminating synthesized instruments, much less amplification altogether!? That includes not just equipment costs, but upkeep, transportation, and usually an extra staff to run it as well. And don't even get me started on props... there's a goldmine of savings in those things (usually, at least). I know some corps get them donated; what if the company had given them money instead of props, though? I doubt there is; most corps I've had insight in are thinking about the coming year, not years down the road. That seems like something DCI would want to have a vision for, and work with the individual corps to make it a reality. Does anyone know if DCI is looking into ways to save money as well as make more? Just curious; I certainly have no inside info.

I suppose that's fair enough. And put like that... you're right, it sound extremely ridiculous.

Yes... except it's not only a question of 'working harder.' An open class corps can work their patooters off, but they won't have the equipment, members, or staff to put on the same production as a world class corps- simply in terms of numbers. Without money, the corps will have nowhere to work, much less getting people there to work in the first place. Historically, the corps that do the best in DCI are the corps that are the best funded. They are the best funded, so they win, and this garners them more funding. If we keep giving the winners more and more of the earnings, the smaller groups will die out, as has been happening for the last 12 years. In the year 2000, there were something like 46 Div II/III corps alone, plus 20-some in Div I. Now there are 36 total. On the other hand, if the winners were not compensated head and shoulders above everyone else, would they all of a sudden stop competing? I have my doubts that the Blue Devils, Cavaliers, or anyone else would say "well if we're not payed X, Y, and Z, we just won't field a show this year."

Phantom: The finale from Mahler 7. You'll need a trumpet with mad chops, but I'm guessing you can dig one out from somewhere. Blue Devils: If you want to continue in this artsy direction, fine: Stan Kenton's "This is an Orchestra" Cavaliers: Do something similar to 2012, but make it so people who aren't me enjoy it too. Blue Stars: Short Ride in a Fast Machine- it's fast and complex, just how you like it. Oh, and no props, por favor! SCV: I think it's time to rehash Festive Overture again. Oh, and Troop: Billy the Kid, by Copland. And Billy Joel. Combine them.

If he hadn't limited himself to the Cadets, you could always say 2007 Madison, when they played "Kashmir."

If I was arguing they were the best, you'd be absolutely right. But you might want to re-read my post and make sure you understand it before replying- just a thought :-). I said he writes the most work, because every year that I've known where he was (I am not sure about 2012), they have had the most content. Certainly in 2010 and 2011 when he was with Blue Stars. I just wasn't sure where he was last year. But with the work their guard was doing, I would bet he was still in la Crosse.

I've been following this thread for a while. I'm sorry this is off topic, but I feel we could use some positive thinking, so here I am :) Here's what I think is funny: placement and scores aside, 2012 was my favorite cavaliers show since the machine, and I think I like it better than that. Which would mean its my favorite show since about 2004 from the green machine. I know most people didn't care for it... But I thoroughly did. Except for the intro- it was just a little long for me.

Did I make any claims about cleanliness or ability? No. I commented on content. And if you ate honest, you will admit that BD's guard has less content than Shapiro's. And frankly, doing that with a hula hoop is pretty easy. Try it sometime. EDIT: And I haven't watched any Avd's, but I have my now doubts that finals was as "perfect" as you claim. I was at finals, on the 50, and while I thought it was clean, it certainly didn't make my head pop off either.

Yes they are versatile. But I can't agree with the snippet I have quoted. They are very clean, yes, but from a content standpoint, I have to say that Michael Shapiro's guard does more, if not the most in DCI. At the moment, that is Blue Stars, I believe. Sorry to nitpick, but I couldn't let that go.

*boldly opens can of worms* Cavies 2012 was my favorite show of theirs since "The Machine." There, I said it and I'm not taking it back. Ignoring corps who I tend to not like on a yearly basis, the most 'questionable' show for me has to be "Rach Star" The corps was fantastic... I just couldn't stand the show concept. Let the hate commence... I'm sorry- just my opinions.

I have to agree... The one thing the corps might be able to do (having never seen one of pr's or bc's helmets) is steal the inside design- again, not sure what that looks like, but I remember a significant "fitting" issue when they wore the helmets, even in early 2008

I thought the grey (gray?) worked well for Houdini, but as a general uniform I liked the 2008-2009 white pants better. I understand and agree with the reasons for changing from the old blue and cross-straps, but it would be cool to see those return in some variation. I know in 2008 when we changed from the helmets to the shakos there was a lot of uproar from the veterans. The shakos with that uniform definitely look better, though. As much as I would love to see the helmets return, I would want them to renovate the inner mechanism so they stay straight and fit everyone.

Maybe I'm a young snot-nosed kid, but I honestly do not see anything wrong with a show like that. I know it's old-school, and I understand new tools are available to visual designers, but 'use of modern tools' is not on the sheets. According to the sheets, the only things evaluated are content and performance; if the content is effective and demanding, and it is performed well, then theoretically any kind of show should be able to win DCI in 2013. I don't think it would, though. Which to me presents a problem; why shouldn't an old-school show which is effective and demanding score as highly as a new-school show which is equally effective and demanding? EDIT: grammar

I marched 4 years of a world class corps, and was on staff with one last year. This year, I real life intervened, and I thought I would not be able to do drum corps. then, I got a call and ended up spending the last 3 weeks with an open class corps. It was the most rewarding season of drum corps thus far. I would thoroughly encourage anyone to get involved. Especially if you are looking to first get involved in drum corps. You may find a home you never knew you had. I certainly did.