parrotonmyshoulder

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 That was a direct attack on another person's instruction and education, simply based on the fact that he doesn't mind a little edge. Im sure thats what the directors of show bands tell themselves (i.e. grambling, southern...etc)

Very well put. Letting things slide because of emotion and energy means that the line doesn't have control. All corps tick, from BD to Pioneer. It's part of the performance. Is it a good thing? No. Should a hornline play beyond their means on purpose? Of course not. But, on Finals night, in the case of say PR, when they let that last note rip, I can't possibly blame any member of the hornline for letting tone quality be d@mnned and giving 110%. To me it shows passion and heart, obviously qualities that are more important to some people and corps than others. I will remember seeing Phantom perform that night for the rest of my life. To me they were better than any corps I've ever seen, because they poured the souls through their bells that night and I don't care it came out a little ratty. But that's not to say the Cavaliers have no heart. I can feel the passion when they play "Over the Rainbow". I just wish they could put that feeling into a field show. Thats all fine and dandy, but don't complain when Regiment finishes 4th in brass playing that way. Hmm, I don't remember ever complaining about their placement. I personally think SCV should have beat them. Then again my complaint with their show wasn't the horns. Anyway, what I'm trying to understand is how people can make generalizations about an entire hornline and their staff, especially the staff, based off of individual ticks. When a corps puts on a performance to an audience, they dont say "we are going to perform for you, but we want you to understand how/why our staff teaches." A corps performs a PRODUCT to an audience. to an audience member, what they see during a performance is the only thing that matters. otherwise, they would list the teaching philosophies of every corps in the DCI program. any person who watches Phantom Regiment perform is a phantom regiment audience member. the audience judges the PRODUCT, and that is all. the audience is not supposed to judge the PRODUCT based on inside information about Phantom Regiments teaching. This thread is about sound quality. This thread is not about "sound quality with exceptions given to how corps X teaches." The fact of the matter remains - corps X could rehearse by rubbing peanut butter and jelly all over their bodies during lip slurs, while corps Y does not. If corps X and corps Y comes out to a performance making beautiful, controlled, emotional, and intonationally correct sounds, it doesnt matter what they do behind close doors. (as long as its not demeaning to its members) Phantom Regiment did not (to an extent) make those sounds. Other corps did.

Its obvious that TubaDevil has had some good teachers in the "new school" of drum corps. I realize that a lot of you marched in a day when emotion and earplugs were the top priority over execution. but drum corps has changed. While emotion and energy are still key issues, flawless execution of sound and marching is what takes the cake. thats what seperates the big boys from the rest of the pack (show design too, of course). Drum corps that are successful in this new arena realize that to be ahead of the pack, you must throw out the old rules, and use the correct techniques which mimic the worlds best musicians (wind ensembles, orchestras, accomplished soloist, etc.) 10 or 15 years ago, there were no drum corps that could compare to other top organizations (wind ensembles, symphonies, etc) as far as sound quality. but i think no one can argue that we've all heard some things in drum corps in the past 2 years that could compare to some of these groups

Do you or did you march any corps? yes

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? you dont understand what i am saying. wynton marsalis and allen vizutti have different sounds, but neither one of them are bad sounds. the chicago symphony and the los angeles symphony have different sounds, but they BOTH SOUND GOOD a drum corps overblowing and not matching sounds BAD and utilizes INCORRECT TECHNIQUES. a drum corps playing with control and good intonation sounds GOOD and utilizes CORRECT TECHNIQUES. why do you think that so many studio teachers dread sending their students to these "balls to the wall" drum corps? because they come home sounding like feces btw, i fixed your quotes

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 those are all great players, but ive never heard any of them try to play past their own limitations. however, i have heard drum corps attempt to play beyond their limitations of supported sound

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

THANK YOU!!!!! god, finally someone has some musical sense. geez...

one word.....zaja

sorry i didnt see the "i play trumpet now" part lol. guess it would have helped to read the replies too

you need to remember that as a tuba player, you have a lot of metal on your face. so yes, make sure that the MP is comfortable on your face. the shape of the bowl should be decided on what type of horn you play on. generally, funnel cups are for american horns and bowl cups for german horns. the size of the cup and mass of the MP also depend on what kind of horn you play on. dont get into the habit of thinking that a MP will improve your sound or range. your MP should not be a crutch. YOU make the sound, not the MP. find one mouthpiece and stick with it, unless you get another horn some of the better music stores will let you buy 3 at a time, try them out, then send back the ones you dont like (of course you get refunded). www.dillonmusic.com i play on a dillon helleburg 1 (bronze core). my instrument is a 1978 5-valve conn 3J

i agree with you, to an extent, but the QUALITY of sound has increased ten-fold. drum corps now-a-days (in some organizations) is a place where private instructors dont cringe when their students come home from tour

space chords can be exciting, i just havnt seen any evidence that they enhance musicianship