Hornhoser

Just work twice as much next summer!

Great point. You are absolutely right. I would say MOST of the kids who audtion for the Colts, or other non-top six corps, are auditioning there because they want to be there. The kids picked up from other corps cuts are not the majority of the kids that ultimately comprise the corps roster. But they certainly can be welcome additions, assuming they pass their auditions of course. HH

Where do you think kids go when they are cut from other corps? Most of the non-top 6 corps pick up kids that were cut from their "dream" corps. Ya know, I initially took this as just more doom and gloom predictions. You know, just a Colts naysayer, not a fan. But after reading your profile and seeing that you are Colts alum, now I see that you may be simply concerned for the future of your corps. The Colts are quietly working away at having another big year. I'm sure they would welcome you coming to a camp for their Sunday show and tell. Then you can see for yourself. And show your support for the kids, wherever they come from. HH

Best closers?.... Hmmmm...... Does Dennis Eckersley or Mariano Rivera count?

To borrow from Mark Twain... Rumors of the Colts demise have been greatly exaggerated. The corps will be fine. As the corps director Greg Orwoll, often says, "these are not problems, they are challenges". Some rearranging in schedules, some altered recruiting efforts, some adjustments to production schedules....These are issues that can be dealt with. There are many other unplanned issues of greater magnitude that would be hard to respond to and overcome. And there is a whole winter and spring in which to respond as needed. I mean it's not like the corps cancelled move-in. Now THAT would be hard to overcome. HH

What some of you seem to be missing about this, is the fact that this is NOT a public ban on smoking if you allow it to occur in one public place (the local casinos) but not another (Colts bingo). It is only a ban on SOME public places that will surely impact the Colts with three Casinos within a mile or two of them. As a former smoker I see both sides of the ban, but am in favor of being able to breathe air free of that stinky stuff. Not for health reasons mind you, because I am doing a fine job of killing myself at the buffet, but just because it stinks and bothers me just like steel mills belching out noxious clouds of smoke would bother me. I think I have the right to breathe clean air and that that right supersedes the rights of others to stink up my air. BTW, I wish we had a ban on the overuse of Axis! Anyway, the inequity here is in the fact that gamblers like to smoke and drink (as well as other vices) and the state law is allowing them to do this in in one gambling establishment, but not another. That is like saying that you can smoke in Tai, Chinese and Italian restaurants, but not in seafood restaurants, diners, coffee houses, or steak houses. If you are going to make a public ban on indoor smoking, then it should apply to all public indoor facilities and not just for the ones who don't have the political and/or financial clout to make their own establishment exempt from such laws. This is all about casino money people. HH

Very true. But imagine that these 15 people were put in an ensemble together. Do you think they'd all continue to play with their respective "styles"? I certainly hope not, because it'd be a pretty awful ensemble. I would hope that these fine players, assuming some of them were still alive B) , would be able to listen and match in all aspects of playing. Is it bad to want an ensemble that sounds matched and balanced? I certainly don't think so. But if that's not your preference, to each his own. Martin Oh God no. Can you imagine what that would sound like? Probably a lot like any brass line at December camp, I imagine. No, I don't think they would be able to continue to play in their respective styles because of the needs of the ensemble to have cohesion and clarity. (Unless as soloists of course.) They would have to adapt to the ensemble's chosen sound character and style of playing, otherwise they would not blend. In our world, they would be a tick machine. So no, it is not bad to want matched sounds and to balance the ensemble. But in reference to the way this discussion has developed, when individuals make mistakes in a group's chosen style, that does not make that style wrong and another's right, as suggested by others here. It simply means one does their "schtick" better than the other. HH

That depends upon how you define limitations. Dizzy, Maynard, Mangione, Miles Davis all have moments that you could define as exceeding their limitations by comarison to Herseth, Marsallis or even Al Vizutti for that matter. But does that diminish their chosen style of playing? Or does that challenge the listener to consider the expression and emotion of the thought or expression as being the most important musical expression, as compared to players who are all about technical precision, clarity and nuance? I don't know if I could pick the best between Wyton Marsallis who is absolutely incredible technical wizard or Miles Davis who is a pure genius at expressing the raw, edgy emotional qualities that underly the music. Consider brass ensembles for a moment. Would anyone consider the style of brass playing as exemplified by the Chicago Symphony to be either the right way or the wrong way? What about Los Angeles, New York, or Cleveland? As individuals or ensembles, the are all very different, but which is right? That is why the hair goes up on the back of my neck whenever I see or hear someone talking about a chosen approach to sound as if it was wrong or implying that a person who likes a different concept is not well educated (referencing your statement, "no. it means the university or drum corps that taught you did not do it's job correctly). Folks, this is challenging. Like individual performance artisits, hornlines each have their own chosen character of sound. They make their own decisions as to which sound character and style of playing they are going for. When individuals in an ensemble make mistakes by exceeding the ensemble's established sound characteristics or limitations, regardless of the chosen approach, that is called ticking. But that does not make one group's chosen style of performance right or wrong compared to another. And it certainly does not diminish one's right as a listener to like one style better than another. Which is better? Apples or oranges? HH

Let me see if I got this right. Since I like Phantom's sound better than Cavies I must be an unsophisticated, neanderthal eared, general audience member incapable of appreciating the higher end sonorities produced by the only hornline in history to produce beautifully intoned sounds for an entire show???? no. it means the university or drum corps that taught you did not do it's job correctly Oh I see. So there is one and only one correct concept of sound and that is the one YOU were taught is correct. Hmmm... Since a picture (or in this case, sound ) is worth a thousand words, which of the following diverse group of musicians, plays with the "correct" sound concepts? - Dizzy Gillespie - Louis Armstrong - Miles Davis - Adolph Herseth - Wynton Marsallis - Maynard Fergusen - Doc Severinson - Chuck Mangione - Phillip Farkas - Dennis Brain - Jack Teagarden - JJ Johnson - Joseph Alessi - Arnold Jacobs - Pat Sheridan I think the most honest answer is that they all play with a unique and very different character of sound that is correct for them and for the style of music they choose to portray. This notion that there is only one correct sound concept is a really bunch of pseudo-academic clap-trap that is passed down to unsuspecting students by high school band directors and college professors but has little merit in the real world outside of academia. Now don't get me wrong, I am not being critical of you. I am being critical of a system (whichever one you were taught by) that teaches and enforces this notion that there is only one right way of doing things. I mean if we all thought that way, we would still be playing on sack-butts and harpsichords (and loving it)! Thank God, for a diversity of musical styles to choose from whether in drum corps or in the real world. And to each his own. I'm not sure I would enjoy this activity if everyone sounded like everyone else simply because the activity or any of the haughty psuedo-acamdemians who wander this activity, forced corps to play the one and only one correct way. Perhaps there is enough room in this activity for a diversity of different sound concepts which go beyond the right and wrong (i.e. ticks) and allows for corps to explore their chosen style to their fullest and to excite people in whatever ways they choose to be excited, whether cerebral and serene, or raw, edgy and emotional. HH

Okay, we polled the best low brass section of 2002, so... Of the top ten corps 2002 Division 1 Finalists (sorry, 10 is the limit on this), who do you think had the best high brass section (that's sops/trumpets AND mellos/flugels/altos/horns)? And why?.... HH

Spirit was a top 10 corps..... how come they werent mentioned? We have a pretty good contra section at spirit. -------------------- David Nichols Spirit sop '01-present GBE4L David: Bigtime WHOOPS! When you set up a poll, you are limited to 10 choices, otherwise I would have included the entire top 12. I was trying to list the top 10 but I apparently inverted your placement with Magic's. My apologies to ALL the Spirit low brass. You guys had an tremendous low brass section and didn't mean to ignore you. Can anyone at DCP tell me how to edit this poll to correct this? HH

Of the top 10 corps at the 2002 DCI Finals, who do you think has the best low brass section (that's baritones, euphonium, contras) and why?

ENOUGH! Please...can we get the facts straight? (taking a deep breath now.....) VISUAL: GE = 20 points PERFORMANCE = 30 points (20 marching+20 ensemble+20 guard)/2 TOTAL = 50 points MUSIC: GE = 20 points PERFORMANCE = 30 points (20 brass+20 ensemble+20 percussion)/2 TOTAL = 50 points Now, it's been a while since I have been in school, but I am pretty sure that this equals a 50/50 split between visual and music. Furthermore, the color guard actually represents (essentially) 10 points of the 60 points available for captions and 1/10th the overall score. This is the exact same point allotment as for brass and percussion. So how exactly do the sheets give too much emphasis to the color guard? Where exactly is dance being emphasized over music? What should the visual effects judge do? Ignore the guard and anything that resembles dance? Dance and guard have been an integral part of the activity for the last....30...40....50 years. Should we not judge these things? I might also point out that there are 4 visual judges and 4 music judges. How are the visual judges calling the shots when there are an equal amount of music judges giving scores? Are you saying that the visual judges are dictating what the music judges do? If you think that the music judges are easily influenced by the visual judges you are mistaken. There are some egos involved here that are not easily influenced by anyone, much less someone who is not trained in music adjudication. Sorry Victrussell if I sound like I'm ranting at you. This is really directed at the many posts I have read here (and there) blaming the system for giving more weight to the visual portion of the programs when it's actually a 50/50 split. Please someone....anyone explain how 50/50 is uneven because I don't see it. Hornhoser (trained in old math and not a visual person)