Loud-is-good

Right... so someone deriding those shows over and over and talking about their crap technique, and then talking about his version of "excellence" being required to be memorable, is silly. I guess either my sarcasm or yours didn't come through.

I guess we'll see how much people "truly remember" phantom regiment 03 and 06 in 10 years.... Doesn't seem that suspenseful. One show per corps is a ##### eh?

First of all, I wouldn't mention the word "capitalization" in any of your posts; that's just setting yourself up. Secondly, it is almost comical to hear you talking about hornlines that are going to be "remembered forever." Sorry bud, a lot of the recent shows which you frequently deride are going to be remembered for a lot longer, and a lot more fondly, than any you have ever marched in.

Someone earlier stated "you can play with expression while maintaining balance and complete intonation." The CSO can do it. The Cavaliers can't, though they try.

Haha yeah, like Phantom Regiment, who you would think were brass playing's version of the spawn of Satan from some of the comments people make on here.

This is exactly what I meant when I said that the physics behind a perfectly intune hornline turned out to be theoretical when actually applied to drum corps.

Just to respond to a few things: Yes, playing out of tune, etc., is never a good thing. However, where I take issue with terminology such as "mature" is dictating just what priority it has to be given in relation to everything else. Not everyone that likes really loud hornlines is some sort of knuckledragging mouth breather; some of us really do have decent music educations (and heck, the brass caption head at PR is a member of IMO the best brass quintet in the world). This leads into my next point... Where I really take issue is for someone to say that "playing loud" is some sort of historical relic that has been passed by. Some people may have different standards for what they want from the activity (the judges certainly do); this shouldn't be projected on everyone though. If the standards had changed so dramatically for what people wanted, then there would've been different fan favorite corps the last several years. People like what they like; whether a given group wants to cater to that is up to them, but it can't be ignored or marginalized. As for one last thing- how you learn to play in this activity as compared to how you might learn to play at, say, college. People ought to be able to separate a method of playing designed to work in a FOOTBALL STADIUM for a drum corps show as compared to one designed to work in say, a concert hall on a (God forbid) Mozart symphony. It's largely a matter of your goal for a given performance, as related to your audience. A large part of that audience for drum corps just happens to realize that they can get a controlled concert type sound anytime they want by going and listening to, you know, a symphony orchestra, and better than any drum corps can possibly do it. Those same people might want a rare opportunity to simply get their faces blown off when they are at a drum corps show. Of course, other people's priorities are different; neither is really better or worse though.

The elitism in some of these posts makes me sick. Hearing about what a "mature" ensemble will do, etc., is a joke. I wouldn't consider myself just some bozo; I have a music degree in a brass instrument from a pretty highly regarded music school. That being said, there is no absolute "right" or "mature" way to play a brass instrument. I swear, some people on these boards would say that the brass section of the CSO or Met Opera Orchestra were playing with a spread tone, or "out of control." The truth is, there are many ways to pursue brass playing. Yes, intonation is always important. Blend is always important. Dynamic contrast is virtually always important. However, how one values those is NOT an objective standard. Some people think that as long as something is in tune and blended, it is God's gift to music. That's fine; whatever someone goes for. Conversely, some people like intonation and blend, but find that it is worthwhile to sacrifice a little in these regards in order to open up the available dynamic range. Again, this approach is fine; whatever matters to someone is what is right for that individual. Where people go wrong is in insisting that their approach is the "right" one. There is no right approach as applies to all of the fans of DCI (or music in general). Yes, there is a right approach insofar as how judges want things; that is fine, and that is why certain corps have done remarkably well in the last several years. However, to insist that a certain corps plays with an objectively "better" style than another is elitist BS; it is all a matter of who is being catered to. If fan A enjoys one corps which plays really loud, but slightly out of tune, while person B enjoys another corps that plays less loudly but better in tune, neither is right. It is only a matter of priority. It is disgusting for people on either side to declare that they are "right" or "mature," however. Why issues like this even come up in a thread that simply asks which is "loudest," not which is "loudest with a sound that I like," I don't know. As for the "in tune is always louder" argument; this generally, in practice, works out to be mostly theoretical. Yes, theoretically, a corps that is PERFECTLY in tune will be the loudest. However, this standard is virtually never met by any actual ensemble; therefore, individual projection usually trumps all. Otherwise, the Cavaliers would've easily been the loudest corps for several years now; anyone with half a brain will agree this simply wasn't the case.

No, it isn't inaccurate. Write down what pretty much anyone on espn (Peter Gammons, Karl Ravech, and Ron Jaworski excepted) predicts at the beginning of the year, and then go look at the end of the year (in fact, just look up any of the "stats" that they purport to cite and you'll see that they literally make up just about everything); it's a joke. Taking a network which still employs an analyst that predicted, all in the same season, that the Yankees would win 130 games, the Red Sox would win their division (thus winning MORE than 130 games), and that Randy Johnson would win 30 games, and using that network as some sort of example of credibility is just silly. Heck, just go read firejoemorgan.com once a week. As for being bitter... it's kinda stupid for someone to blast everyone for making picks without any real reason behind them, and then use as an example of accountability something that isn't accountable at all.

The prognosticators on ESPN are a bunch of idiots. Seriously, go look at almost any of their records in any of the major sports at the end of any season; if you depended on them to place bets, you'd have your legs broken right now. If you are going to point at the right way to make predictions, for the love of God don't base it off of a bunch of boneheaded former players on ESPN who do no research and just spout crap off with no accountability, because they are NO better than anyone on here.

AHAHAHA I just started laughing out loud in the middle of a con law lecture when I saw this. On topic, I don't see them breaking into top 3. They were only one spot out last year, but weren't really close.

That's fine. Some people also actually like Regiment's visual. The point is, you took a dig at Regiment for their shows being apparently one sided; I was just pointing out that a lot of people would say the same thing about your corps. It's all opinion; I just don't understand your unwillingness to simply let people enjoy what they like about Regiment without constantly feeling the need to shoot down some aspect of their shows (I'm sure you get annoyed at anyone that can't let anything good get said about Cavaliers without hearing "yeah, but their music is boring/they don't play above mf/it's easy).

I, and a lot of people I know, love watching Cavaliers drill, but will often just talk right over the music without paying any attention. A lot of us recommend just watching the Cavaliers on DVD without bothering to listen to them. hmm.... it's interesting when some people talk about a musical/visual ensemble and say don't listen, just watch...

You have a constitutional right for the government not to interfere with your posting on a message board. This has nothing to do with a private organization at all. They can tell you not to say whatever they want (even most government whistle blowers aren't protected from being fired based on recent SCOTUS jurisprudence). So, no, the first amendment doesn't apply at all here.

SCV I bet a lot of other Regiment alum feel the same way

This works fine, but the drill has to be specifically written with this in mind. If you tried to straight dot march, with consistent step size and straight paths, some of the drill that non-dot marching corps do, it would be a disaster. With that in mind, either one can work, and neither is better. It is largely dependant on how the drill is designed.

Can't believe no one has mentioned Regiment 89, New World

Don't believe it then.

Regiment 89 or 96, it's a tossup Honorable mention to Cadets 2000, Cavies 2000, and Madison 95

All the Cavaliers I met while I marched were cool on their own. However, at retreat- classless, unequivocal dicks. There is a reason that whenever you see someone on here talking about the Cavaliers as a "classy" corps, it is usually from somone who never marched (or at least never stood next to them at retreat).

For one camp in 03, we had a part shouting "Luxury luxury luxury" in Wild Nights. It was gone by next camp (along with 50% of the other weird #### in that piece).

Regiment 04- Huge departure in style that didn't work; cost the corps a lot of its momentum from 03 Cavaliers 97- Yikes Cadets 06- Bigger Yikes

Coats. Well performed; just no wow factor for me. Hey, my comment about Regiment getting voted off early didn't look so dumb when I made it. Then... they've stayed at the 3rd-4th most off-votes mark for every single round it seems like, making it look like they were going to be voted off early, to middle, and now probably right near the end if at all.

That'd be any FF, really

Spirit