93Bluecoat
-
Posts
465 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by 93Bluecoat
-
-
After reviewing the G7 "working document" for quite some time and taking most of the day today to collect my thoughts, I wanted to share some points about this proposal and what options DCI, the corps (both G7 and non), and the fans have. I'll go point by point.
Assertion #1...DCI's Fiscal Stability. In the document G7 states that DCI has dropping attendence (it does), more corps under it's umbrella than it can support (true), and change is necessary (true). So far, they are 3 for 3, you can't really agure with it.
Assertion #2..."DCI's top corps drive the activity and deserve/need greater fiscal support. Corps are NOT the same. Those who drive sales through excellence and entertainment ability deserve to be rewarded." True, corps are not the same and TRUE, top corps deserve a greater share at each show. This assertion states that excellence and entertainment ability deserve to be rewarded. Ok, give the Troopers and Madison Scouts all the money because they seem to be the only corps designing with entertainment. Their assertion is true, their reasoning is incorrect. I'm LESS likely to go to a show that feature 3 of the top corps and not much else. I'm MORE likely to go to a show if 7 of the top 15 are there with a nice cross representation. G7 proposal starts to show some cracks in it's arguement.....
Assertion #3..."Premiere corps are essential to DCI's success and require greater influence." Really? Are you telling me that David Glasgow of the Bluecoats carry's more perspective and requires greater attention than Mark Arnold of the Blue Knights? This assertion seems to want to keep the opinions of some at bay. In reality what it could be is a small group (Gibbs/Hopkins?) influencing the rest of the G7 corps. Are these corps "essential" to success though? How has DCI done since Star of Indiana left? If the G7 corps took their ball and left to form their own "Marchings Major League" and DCI was left with all the other member corps, wouldn't it be safe to also asert that this would only make the remaining DCI corps stronger since they could now have more money. This would essentially solve one of the problems in Assertion #1 in that DCI has too many corps to support. Cut out 7 corps that are overpaying their own staff, overpaying to ship their own personnel all over the country for audition camps, and create rules every year mandating the use of more expensive equipment, I think we'd solve a lot of problems from the get go. I think many of the fan base enjoyed DCI when there were MORE rules in place governing the shows. It was a better product. Get rid of the G7, or ahem, let them for their own tour, and suddenly DCI may have it's activity back. Madison could win in 2011! Or Boston Crusaders! I say this tongue in cheek of course but its a viable alternative. I wonder how many students (either HS or college) are going to want to be in a G7 type performing group? I enjoyed the competition, more of them the better. If I'm paying thousands of dollars to do this activity all summer, I want to do more than a Friday-Saturday-Sunday circuit. ....just my opinion I know.
Assertion #4..."Corps need to be classified to assist in the marketing of the activity. Not all corps are music's major league." Ummmmm, no. The Troopers deserve the same marketing opportunities if they are a part of DCI as the Cavaliers.....the marketing should be geared to the REGION. If there's a show in Utah, Wyoming, or Colorado....the Troopers and Blue Knights should be all over the marketing. If the show is on the east coast, Crown and Cadets and so on for the Midwest, South and West. This is such a useless assertion by G7 and its really a reach at best. It also shows a poor approach toward marketing.....cheapening one brand (even though it has earning potential) for the benefit of another. I work in music retail...if I sell 1 $2000 guitar because of a promotion that I do that's great. If I work hard to sell 10 $400 guitars, I've done better. This is the approach DCI marketing should take. The rest of the assertion #4 is actually a good debate if there is a way to financially make regional corps more cost effiicient it should be explored.
Assertion #5.."Events can be created to be more marketable. We can reclaim our position as marching musics elite." There's one flaw to this assertion...that the events they wish to create would be supported by a fan base that does not want any part of their bastardized version of what they call drum corps. I'm a die hard Bluecoat alum and fan but would have a tough time attending one of the "shoved down your throat" events. Later on in this document G7 proposes that these events would be geared, almost entirely, towards music education and audience interaction. Great if you are a pimply faced 16 year old with aspirations of greatness (however that's not DCI's major paying customer)....not so great if you are 38 year fan of the activity. The so called "event" really wouldn't appeal to the current DCI fan base. The last statement in this assertion says "better events will draw more attendence over time". Really? Check out how Blast is doing now? It's run it's course and so would the "schtick" of the G7 over hyped performances. It panders to the lowest common denominator.
Assertion #6..."We would like to affect change in DCI." Hey, now you're talking! I think DCI knows that change is needed, but not what G7 is proposing with is to essentially dissolve the influence of the organized corps (DCI), which, mind you, most of them were a part of 38 years ago when this whole thing started. The G7 proposal essentially states in this portion of the document that DCI be stripped of most of it's personnel and their coordinatiing positions be handed over to the corps to manage (the G7 corps that is, which would mean they control any non G7 activity as well). This is unacceptable. An audit seems to be necessary to see if expenditures within DCI are necessary or could be utilized differently. I sounds as if the G7 has found some things within the DCI infastructure that are excessive and those areas need to be addressed, perhaps by an outside source (I have several on the top of my head right now that would be great). I think it would extremely premature to simply dissolve 1/2 of the DCI infastructure to appease one season.
Summary of the assertions...."The preceding 6 assertions are the “truths” that drive this discussion. Within these assertions one can see where the worries and dreams lie." These are not truths. These are ghastly assumptions with foundations in what is best for 7 drum corps rather than DCI as a whole.
Future Vision 1...."As we travel from town to town, we can recreate our positioning so that we are an AMERICAN CELEBRATION! We can celebrate our country, we can celebrate music, we can do all we can to support music education programs in the community near where we perform." Drum Corps is not an "American" celebration. The history has heritage in many cultures and countries other than America. This sounds eerily similar to the story of Antonin Dvorak composing the "New World Symphony" to show American composers how to compose American music. The "New World Symphony" has nothing American about it. It sounds as if it could have been the Czechoslavakian national anthem in fact. The events proposed do not NEED to be American Celebrations (it's not necessary) but creating performances and doing outreach to connect with your fans is advisable. How about programming a field show that doesn't need a libretto?
Future Vision 2..."Marching music partnership. THE QUESTION IS NOT WHAT BAND PEOPLE CAN PAY FOR … it is WHAT CAN WE DO for BAND PEOPLE !!!" Ok, this is getting ridiculous. I've said this for the better part of a decade, drum corps must stop hiding behind the veil of education. They are not education and do not exist for that purpose (nor should they). This is ridiculously short sighted because 75% of the bands in America are not DCI driven in nature (most could care less, despite what these directors think). Ask a band director of a 300 member band in Texas that does A&M military drill if hanging out with the Bluecoats is high on his list of priorities. Most likely he would agree that it would be a cool thing to do, but he's not interested. He's got some precision snap turns to teach. Ask band directors in rural Eastern Kentucky, West Virginia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana if they plan on gathering their kids up in the middle of the summer to drive two or more hours so his kids can hang out with the Blue Devils and have their staff tell him what a great band director he is. If you're a band director that "needs" this, you need to re-evaluate why you are a teacher! The "events" mentioned in this ridiculous vision are short sighted in nature because they going to pander to an excruciatingly small portion of the American band population. If marketing is one of your goals, why would you focus on such a small percentage of the market?
Future Vision 3...."A partnership with pageantry. we are to go after band students, guard, dance, and other related arts and pageantry organizations. Who we are … and how we define ourselves and the relationships will be resolved but to be sure …WE CANNOT BE ISOLATED. WE NEED TO BE LIKE OUR PEERS AND STOP INSISTING WE ARE DIFFERENT AND BETTER." AGAIN, if better marketing is one of your objectives, why are we focusing on such a small portion of our audience (bands, guard, dance, related arts)? We need to stop insisting we are different and better? Why? Did anyone read Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand? Being different and better is what drives capitalism and as I read this document, it would appear that money is what this is coming down to (when you sift through the rest of the bovine residue). Being better money makers (i.e. different AND better than all other mediums) would seem like a good idea. This smells too much like "WGI is doing a great job of drawing our market share, so instead of doing something to combat that, we'll just get in bed with them". The activities are no doubt linked in nature, however, what's wrong with drum corps insisting that they put out a better product than WGI?
Future Vision 4...."Weekends will be supershow weekends." Apparently the proposal insinuates that there would be events Friday, Saturday and Sunday relating to the show. What fan base would utilize this? Alums don't have three days to dedicate. Bands, guards, and other arts organizations are not going to dedicate hotels and travel expenses to participate in events that are essentially gregarious in comparison to the actual show.
Future visions 5-7 deal with current shows and business relationships. Not much to comment on here.
Future visions 8...Cut 1/2 of the DCI staff to save money and/or redistribute the wealth. This to me, seems like a coup and raid of the DCI coffers, however after further consideration and in what I stated earlier, it would appear that some kind of external audit is necessary for the operating structure of DCI (this is actually what my brother does for a living, and yes, he's a DCI vet! Haha).
Future Vision 9...Improved fiscal structure for G7 corps. This is a huge assumption. MLB hasn't done well with revenue sharing (this is essentially what this proposal is) and this plan assumes it to be the fix all for DCI problems.
The next part of the G7 document deals with governance. It basically gives the G7 corps all the control. Its just not right.
The next part of the G7 document deals with scoring....it is interesting, needs tweeking and discussion, but its not bad.
Overall, this is bad for the activity. It assumes much and guarantees nothing. They have developed a marketing plan that targets and even smaller audience than what DCI currently has. Fiscally I don't see how this would benefit the activity as a whole because the shows would be so different. G7 performances would be totally different that touring or regional corps, so what chance would they ever have to crack into the G7? Correct, they would have none because the proposal gives the G7 a competitive advantage through better, more and increased rehearsal time.
Allowing this to happen would fracture the competitive balance in nature. We'd have two different circuits confusing your fan base/consumer....and essentially diluting the brand (again, if this is truly about marketing, then lets discuss it in those terms).
What CAN happen? G7 can take their idea and run with it, with no help from DCI. Create their own Marching's Major League, or whatever they want to call it. Have it live on the Ocho someday. That would leave Boston, Blue Stars, Glassmen, Troopers, Colts et. al. to pick up the people that DON'T WANT TO BE A PART OF THE G7 ORGANIZATIONS AND ACTUALLY MARCH IN A COMPETITIVE TOURING UNIT, to make the remaining organizations and shows that much better. If the Glassmen suddenly got a portion of the talent that Bluecoats, Cavies and PR had (just becuase those kids want to do drum corps and not the G7 dog and pony show), do you have confidence that they could produce a great show? I do. I think many corps could. We could see the Crossmen crack the top 4!
If G7 happens with cooperation from DCI, I think we'll see a fan base so disillusioned that it will fade, kind of like Blast did over the years.
That was a lot. Had to say it. I know some higher ups with disagree, but I am certain in my conviction and share the thoughts of many fans, members, staffers, volunteers, and alums.
DW
-
David, You and I have butted heads over the years on here but we are in total agreement on this issue. Speaking as a former board member for one of the said G7 corps, this is a bad idea of epic proportions.
Remember when Star of Indiana took it's ball and left in '94 over a similar concerns? Although the by product of this separation was something cool (Blast) its incarnation of success has quickly faded and the fans and alumni of Star of Indiana (and DCI) were left with a void. The G7 runs the risk of this very same thing happening to them.
Some of the wording in the G7 document is disturbing in that they propose that possibly they can produce a better circuit and almost insist that DCI can't operate it's own activity. I can understand frustrations with DCI (this activity is not perfect and I think more needs to be done to help ALL corps), but to insinuate that a G7 circuit would be advisable at this point (especially with such a poor business plan) is crazy.
I'm at work right now, a little riled up....will write a full response tonight....another manifesto I suppose!
DW
Here we are in 2010. The elitists have now proposed a system that will take money an opportunities away from other corps while they line their own pockets with more of what the others need. The other corps will drop like flies and the Hopkins/Gibbs vision of the Super 8, now the G7, attempts to become the only game in town. A vision that is over 20 years old.Don't say you didn't see it coming because I was posting about this nearly 10 years ago. Now it's own paper with a passive threat of the G7 breaking away on their own if DCI does not cater to their demands, basically saying give us the money and the power or we are out of here.
Did you notice how the proposal refers to "winds" instead of "brass" on the new adjudication sheets? Did you notice that the term "band" was used more than "drum corps?" The vision is clear that instrumentation MUST be identical to bands. If not, screw the rest of you and we are out of here.
While I agree that there are some solid and interesting proposals within the presentation, it is clear that this G7 (what does G stand for anyway?) is about money and control of the activity. It is a clear statement, IMO, that the G7 are saying this is all about us, to hell with the rest of you. Then they have the gall to say this will help everyone?
HOW???????????? I have a few questions that I do not see answered in the proposal...
1. How does forcing the others to maintain the typical touring schedule, help them, while you (the G7) get to travel
less, have more rehearsal time, get better sleep and have less expenses while getting paid more?
2. How does diminishing the value of their vote on the direction of the activity help them or the overall activity?
3. How do the G7 statements of;
- Corps are NOT the same. Those who drive sales through excellence and entertainment ability deserve to be rewarded.
- The opinion of these same corps is most important and needs to be valued. It is not wise, or appropriate, that each of the current world class corps have a vote that holds equal influence. Those who sell tickets, those who generate sales, those who are most marketable -need also to control a larger portion of the vote on business and adjudication issues.
show any respect to the others or the activity as a whole? Apparently you feel their programs are not excellent or entertaining.
Apparently you believe they are unwise and inappropriate, therefore incompetent to make decisions about their own activity.
Talk about a slap in the face!
4. If DCI is in financial difficulty, how does cutting the funding to other corps help them to become stable, unless you mean that
defunct is stable? May I remind you of what Mr. Hopkins told us 5-6 years ago when people argued against his vision, "Let's see
what the market will bear." Apparently, the market has not born your vision very well, has it Mr. Hopkins, et. al.? So, now you
propose an even more elitist, unbalanced approach?
5. How will the rest of the corps build support when they have less opportunity to for exposure to larger audiences?
6. How will other corps succeed, "Under the guidance and care of the regional association!" when regional associations are exactly
what DCI killed off with their national touring model in the first place?
7. How does the statement, "Corps Are Independent. We need to care for ourselves." show you are interested in the activity as a
whole? It is clear that you care for yourselves, not anyone else. Wasn't DCI created so that the corps could govern
themselves? Seems to me that you want to govern, all the corps, not just yourselves.
8. The statement that, "The member corps are essential and critical to who we are and where we will be." seems to imply that ALL
the member corps are essential, yet statements like "all corps are not the same," "premier corp drive the activity," and that the
G7, "need to also control a larger portion," show that you see corps like Pioneer, Boston, Madison, etc. are to feel like members
of DCI at all? The G7 will have the controlling vote meaning all others really have no say whatsoever.
9. How are we supposed to have any confidence in this proposal when you say, "don't look for details?" The devil is in the details,
and I believe you are trying to hide the ulterior motives by telling us to dismiss the details. I have an opposite view...I believe
the details should be demanded and provided willingly from you.
10. "If not approved –G7 to decide next steps," Why is G7 deciding the next steps if you are working within DCI?
11. "The G7 are committed to change. We have agreed to pursue this shift within DCI … we are agreed that in 2011 these new
events need to occur; we will act as necessary to enable a change." Are you saying G7 would leave DCI in order to create
your vision? How is that thinking of the overall activity?
Unless you can provide data driven analysis on how your proposal will help the activity as a whole, I see this as nothing more than a power grab. Destroy all other corps and become the elite group of Super-bands.
Drum corps can be a separate/different activity without slapping bands in the face. Separate/different does not mean better. Respect and leadership will show attitude between the two activities. But it is clear to me that you do not respect your own activity.
You all should have listened to Scott Stewart back in 1997. Don't say you were not warned, because you were, more than 20 years ago. It is time to look at the people who have driven the decisions of the activity (many of the G7) and question their ability to provide the leadership to sustain the activity. I would say that the past has shown otherwise.
Rant over. Now I am willing to read comments, questions and scathing criticisms.
- Corps are NOT the same. Those who drive sales through excellence and entertainment ability deserve to be rewarded.
-
One extraordinarily laughable portion of the G7 document (which hammers home that this is an unbelievably egocentric and poorly thought out proposal) is that drum corps is "an AMERICAN CELEBRATION! We can celebrate our country, we can celebrate music, we can do all we can to support music education programs..."
If that isn't the ultimate SCREW YOU to Canadian, UK, German, Japanese and all other international corps, I don't know what is. Drum Corps "International" folks.
Now, I fully realize that the money making events of the primary summer tour is in the USA, however.......just thought I'd point out the abject contradiction in this statement. Drum Corps hiding behind music education (to me) is disturbing. Drum Corps has never depended on their organizations being educational. Why? Because they aren't....still aren't. More later.....
DW
-
I just spent the better part of an hour digesting the G7 proposal and I must say that I'm just floored at the ego centric behavior exhibited in this document. Some thing I actually totally agreed with, but for the most part this is a destruction of the drum corps activity. I can't believe that the organizers of this document have essentially constructed what amasses to a business plan, with absolutely no supporting evidence to prove that the results will work. They predict economic outcomes based on "assertions" and "truths" which, in essense, are contradictory in nature. If I were an investor in this business plan, I'd laugh them out of the office.....
I will take a day or so to fully put my thoughts down, however, the greatest flaw to this plan is counting on bands, dance teams, and guards to completely support this activity. The G7 working document pretty much admits that it is not interested in individual corps doing what is necessary to provide their own organizations with fiscal health (cut YOUR staff budgets and travel expenses rather than slashing nearly all of what DCI has an TAKING their money!). This is tantamount to a coup and raid. It has all the earmarks of DCI basically coming to an end......and for what?
The most alarming facet of this document, is the lack of why audiences are dwindling (couldn't possibly be because the shows have become unentertaining and non fan friendly could it?). They have made the fatal assumption that its everybody else and that none of them could possibly need to improve anything.
This sounds eerily similar to what Major League Baseball has struggled with for several decades now.....salaries and expenses are so high they can no longer sustain it. Higher ticket prices and poorer products are keep fans away in droves....so what is their solution: revenue sharing by raping the DCI coffers and screwing the less competitve units. MLB has done this and it fixed nothing.
As a band director, the product G7 is pushing is also condescending, educationally questionable at best (it sounds more like autograph sessions at a rock concert), panders to the lowest common denominator.
I'll expand on all of this later, however, I will get my initial feelings out there.....this does not look good.
DW
PS See also my manifesto in the DCI world class discussions, you'll find that most agree with me.
-
Two quick things as the OD on this topic.....1) I'm glad it has spurred such lively debate...that's always good if change is ever going to occur and I respect everyone's POV. 2) I think I'm finished with my side of the argument and recieved enough info in response to satisfy me. It has been OVERWHELMINGLY in support of my POV, so I'm glad to hear that I am not the only one.
For those that mentioned that DCP is a "running joke" among members and staff of current drum corps...I'll give you a few straight up stats from messages sent to me via this topic: 3 current staff members from 3 separate top 12 corps messaged me to tell me I was "spot on", 5 current members from 3 current top 12 messaged me that they agrred with me, and 32 alumni representing more corps than I actually counted (just didn't want to has this one out) wrote in support of the manifesto.
I would appear that DCP, or perhaps just this topic, isn't such a "running joke".
DW
-
Maybe because those people do not agree with your POV.
Fair enough.
DW
-
I am likely going to open a huge can of worms here (or perhaps kill this topic). If one was to look at DCI as a market system, chart its growth/recession, then one could make suggestions about the financial stability of DCI. That being the case, IF DCI has shown a trend toward less revenue and assets over the last several years, then one can suggest that either:
A. DCI is not following best business practices (by encumbering questionable expenses and/or by loss of revenue)
B. DCI is helping foster a climate that is not encouraging financial growth (by allowing an unwanted change of the product), or
C. DCI has somehow changed the culture of expectation in relation to what corps is and what is expected of it (in turn alienating fans/alumni)
I submit for your inspection, two examples. One is the DCI Federal 990 Tax form from 2003. The other is the DCI Federal 990 Tax form from 2008.
Look closely.
Are assets up over that time period?
Is revenue down?
Are expenses up?
What do these things suggest about the organization and future of the activity?
You should know better than this...these are returns for a nonprofit which means that revenue and expenses should end up fairly close.
Revenue is up, as it should be. DCI has done things (most significantly through their website and new technology) to tap into new revenue streams. I will submit that looking at these numbers (revenue is UP 1.5 million from '03 ot '08), I would expect it to be more. The thing that the activity may be forgetting is that word of mouth advertising is the best form of advertising! Produce a better product, spend less money on shoving down your consumer's throat, use the money to help support struggling corps!
Sorry, its late and I'm getting absurd!
DW
-
As I stated earlier, I've followed the activity since '75 so when I say I have enjoyed the shows of the past 10 years just as much as any other decade I am able to make a direct comparison.
Everything is subjective!
I've seen "Asphalt Cocktail" performed by a great college band and I loved it, but I know a few others in attendance were simply not fans of this particular Mackey work.
I've also seen "Asphalt Cocktail" performed by the Bluecoats and thought it is was AWESOME.
(And I dare say I think John Mackey would love what they've done with it.) Obviously some, like you, are not as enthusiastic.
I do hope you are sharing in the joy the Bluecoats are feeling tonight. You talked earlier about the great feelings you had with the corps in '92. Believe me, those kids are feeling like that at this very moment.
Actually I like it a lot, but there's more they can do with it...I want to see them really kick the ending. They are leaving out some of the best parts of that piece and it could work incredibly at the end of that show! They almost have it....
DW
-
You are imbuing the word "concert" with your own connotations, not mine. I attend rock "concerts" monthly, and they are anything but passive. This past season I've seen the ISO perform Mahler 2, I've seen Yuja Wang perform Rach 3, and I saw the debut of the ISO's new organ for Saint-Saens' Organ Symphony. Each performance ended with a five minute standing ovation, the very same which you believe to be so rare. These were all thrilling performances, made no less so by the fact that I had sat silent throughout.
PS Referring to myself and others as "apologists" is condescending, at best. It demeans your position by the fact that you are communicating a lack of respect for mine.
Apologist, supporter, whatever you want to be called....Bill, Tom, whatever...I'm sorry if its coming off as condescending, but I suppose its frustrating when no one wants to acknowledge that the drum corps experience is no longer geared towards the fan or their consumer.
DW
-
I voted years ago. I have not attended a show since 2004.
Why bother? The shows are just WGI shows expanded and with live music. At best,they are BOA shows done very well. If I want to see excellence in those realms, I can attend their shows.
The kids marching now are better trained and better prepared to produce their product than ever, but I no longer care about the product.
As I tell my students: "Art started in the heart, not the head."
When crowds no longer react from emotion, but rather from intellectual appreciation, I feel we have lost something special.
Yes yes yes.
-
THIS ^
THIS ^
THIS ^
The OP can bring up however many anecdotal examples of "people around him" "shaking their heads" or saying "is it over?" that he wants, but I'm sure any number of people could come up with examples to the contrary.
In the beginning, almost everyone who went to a drum corps show loved drum corps and was a fan. Now, the activity has changed, so you have people that liked the older style better combined with people that like the newer style. This didn't exist "way back when" because there was no "older style". You can say you liked it better back then, but that doesn't mean you're right, or more justified in your opinion. Especially when the argument is based on "trust me, I saw these people act this way" and "I didn't feel good about it, but back then I used to".
Really? Because I've mentioned that I've observed this at many shows across the country for many years now. The Dublin show Wednesday night just happened to be the worst I've seen it. I've been seeing and hearing these same things for about 5 years now.
What the heck are you talking about in that second paragraph? LMAO....I marched in the 90s and if you think there wasn't a difference between the 60s, 70s, and 80s then you haven't got a clue! There have been differences in every decade of drum corps and each has evolved into wonderful additions to the genre. Resistence at first (I played in the first horn line to use 3 valve bugles in '90) was always there, however after seeing how the activity evolved, it was quickly accepted.
What I keep saying is that the fans have NOT accepted this current incarnation of the activity. Its going on a decade and the shows have gotten further and further from being accepted. I don't see a more passionate and growing fan base.....again, this is a consumerism issue.
DW
-
Yours is a legitimate opinion. Whatever choice you make based on that opinion I and others should respect. I know lots of people who stopped going to shows. For them, the activity lost its appeal in the 70s and 80s - what some now call the golden years. They walked away because they no longer felt that spark. That happens. And it's not always a statement about the current state of the activity. Sometimes, it's just life. What we love in our youth isn't necessarily what we love in our maturity. We change too.
HH
You should read the rest of the thread....again, this has nothing to do with the activity passing anyone by. The fact is, the shows don't reach the fan anymore. I'm not sure how much more I can say this. When the activity (or company) decides that it no longer needs to gain market share (fans), it is doomed....probably not now, probably not in 5 years, but ignoring your consumer will get the activity nowhere.
DW
-
If your consensus comes from DCPers agreeing with you, please know that DCP is a huge running joke amongst the members and staff of DCI drum corps.
I've been there....keep in mind my background (board member, touring staff member, etc). I know what the members and staffers think. This isn't about them though (I seem to keep saying that for all you DCI apologists). This is a consumerism issue. DCI is not producing a quality product that the consumer wants anymore. This is how businesses fail. When a business feels it has no need to expand its customer base, failure begins.
I don't think anyone on here cares what members and staff think about DCP when discussing the microeconomic impact of opportunity costs permeating an oligopoly.
-
Standing O's aren't really the culture anymore, though. Once upon a time there was a nice long gap between each number, giving fans plenty of time to stand up and cheer. Now the shows are created as one product and designed to carry momentum throughout. DCI events are as much concerts as they are sporting events. I think there have been moments in every contest I've attended where I have wanted to stand up or cheer, but I felt it would be rude to the people around me. Even if I'm totally jazzed by a show, I rarely stand up before the finish (Phantom 2008 comes to mind as an exception, everyone was standing from the moment Will Pitts was "speared" to the end). I think this is actually a perfect example of things being neither better nor worse, just different.
I guess this is actually what I've been looking for from stalwart DCI apologists....an admission that you're attending a "concert" rather than a drum corps competition. An admission that we are no longer witnessing drum corps as an idiom but a concert. I have NEVER thought of a drum corps show as a concert nor would I ever! Its absurd! Why? Because if I want to hear Asphalt Cocktail in "concert" I'll go watch the Michigan State University wind symphony perform it with Kevin Sedatole conducting! If I want to hear Farandole performed, I'll pick the next time the Cincinnati Symphony is performing it and check it out.
Lance mentioned that some of my comments were "sad" earlier. How sad is it that now drum corps has become a passive activity for the audience? I've been moved in concerts before. When MSU premiered "Asphalt Cocktail" last spring, I lept to my feet and took part in a 5 minute standing ovation. Its was incredible....I will openly admit that isn't the norm, just a great rare performance full of emotion. I see so little of that being communicated to the audience from the corps? Why? Poor design philosophy.
DW
-
Ah, and there's the crux right there. We all have different opinions as to what we find entertaining. I can respect 1983 and 1984 for being legendary productions, even while I agree with Lance that I believe other Cadets shows to be more entertaining.
True, my point was that so few seem to have a genuine appreciation for the actual evolution of the activity. We only think what is current (or fresh in our memory) is the best thing out there. There have been some legendary performances in the '00s, but I can honestly say I appreciated them on the same level as other great shows from the '90s, 80s, '70s and 60s. When someone makes an argument that some of their most memorable performances for them have been recent ones, I like to know if they actually have a basis for comparison. So many that are DCI apologists don't seem to have a base of knowledge prior to mid or late 90s.
Just want to know what they compare their opinions to.
DW
-
Finally a response that makes sense. Thank you! No, I'm not looking for someone to tell me I'm wrong, I want someone to prove it (which would be hard for sure, its an opinion afterall).
I have enjoyed shows over the past decade....probably too many! I've seen a steady decline in aesthetic value in the shows and that's where my rub is however. I like 2 minute long drum features (BK '93, VK '88, '89). I like color guards that take chances with genuinely exposed long segments of difficult work. I love it when horn lines move the stands "a half mile toward Tuscalusa". I love it when drum lines actually have music for 10 minutes of the show, instead of 6 1/2. I love it when the drill makes sense for the viewer, not the drill writer. I liked how tension and release was approached for no other reason than an aesthetic response....it feeds in to why we enjoy music and the arts in the first place. My observations are shared by perhaps more than you care to acknowledge.
I actually like the way corps are utilizing A&E to produce high quality depth of sound (although it is becoming evident that not all corps have good sounds guys, as it widely varying from corps to corps). Many of the current parts of the evolution of the idiom are excellent and shouldn't change. I don't know if you want me to admit that some of what I've mentioned is a generalization? Not all of the shows are awful. However, the design philosophy is.
I can garner enjoyment from competition. I still love checking the scores and reading reviews. I still love the Bluecoats organization, many of the same wonderful people run that organization and I want them to do well. I've mentioned that I don't think the entertainment value (this is the design philosophy I mentioned) matches the prices they are charging now. I'm not going to go completely away, just probably not as many now.
DW
I'm sorry, what response are you expecting to hear? I can tell you how genuinely moved I was by the shows I saw at Finals in 2008. Heck I wrote almost ten thousand words in review of it here on DCP; you can read it in the Review forum. But what I have to say isn't going to change your mind, is it? We have a difference of opinion on what is ultimately a subjective matter. I am still immensely entertained by what I see on the field each year, whereas you are not. What response do you think I could provide to resolve this impasse?Do you want me to tell you that you are wrong? Fine, I will. Shows today are more entertaining than they have ever been, and that's especially true top to bottom. My favorite shows are from the past ten years, some from the past fifteen, but I enjoy hardly any shows older than that. My favorite years for top-to-bottom entertainment have been 2003 and 2006, and I'm awfully excited to see this year's products, based on everything I've been reading. I was lucky enough to see the Blue Stars grand premier, and got a huge rush just from witnessing one corps' standstill. My first show of the 2010 season is on Tuesday. I'm hoping I'll see something to entrance me the way Cavaliers 2002 did, to leave me stunned the way Blue Devils 2004 did, to give me chills the way Blue Knights 2006 did, or something as epic as Phantom 2008. For me, drum corps in the 2000's is better than ever.
If you're still not convinced, then there aren't many more responses I can give you. I've been considering authoring a full rebuttal, and may do so if I have the time this weekend (I've been at work all today). But if my words aren't enough to sway you, then there is little I can say but "maybe you should go enjoy yourself elsewhere". I would never tell anyone to spend money on something they don't value. If you've truly reached the point where drum corps no longer entertains, then the best thing for you may very well be to let it go. I don't say that to be rude or condescending, merely to suggest that in lieu of resolution your best option is likely acceptance.
-
Although many of my issues are with the direction of the activity (I'm fine with a lot of the music choices, really....), I just think the product isn't very good. This has nothing to do with "the way it used to be" or "good art vs. bad art"...because like you mentioned, that argument is arbitrary and up to the individual.
This is a consumerism issue. There is NO WAY anyone could argue that the shows in 2010 generate anywhere close to the level of excitement that shows 10, 15, or 20 years ago did (heck, lets bo back to '68 Royal Airs). I wish there was a way to measure this but there's not.
I'm incredibly passionate about DCI, always have been but I (as well as many that have commented in this rant, as well as MANY MANY fans I have spoken with at shows) feel the current product DCI shoves down our throats just isn't very good. I keep using the word 'aesthetic' but no one seems to be understanding what that means. The shows definitely lack the connection of humanism to music. The connection from performer to audience....its not there.
Once again (I've mentioned this now several times), DCI has no business hiding behind the veil of education (music education specifically). Drum corps inherently teaches you many life lessons, but its not music education. The educational opportunities are obvious, but its kind of like stating that "water is wet". Yes you learn about music (I learned a ton, much of which I'm still using today), but its not music education.
First maybe we should ask the question who is Drum Corpst for:1) Drum Corps is an educational opportunity for the youth. Far beyond music and marching. Drum Corps teaches integrity, effort, team work, excelling, commitment, etc. etc. etc. Drum Corps is first for the youth, the performing members. (Yes a fan base is required for the activity to survive)
2) Drum Corps is a competitive art form, creative, innovative and dynamic. This art form (as all art form) appeals to certain groups (the Fan). As with all art forms they are dynamic and change based on the artist/performers. This change affects the fan base. Some fans may not enjoy where the art form moves to while new fans may be attracted. This is no different that any other art form (Music, Movies, Dress, etc.)
Although I may or may not particularly like every program in the last several years and I may think the activity was “more artistic” 35 years ago when I marched and if I ran my own corps I would do things my way but SO WHAT! This is not 35 years ago and I do not run a Drum Corps. Just because I do not think it is at its artistic best. I’ll bet many (perhaps all) of the members do. Its their time, its there artistic expression, It’s their opportunity to leave THEIR mark (Good or Bad)
If you don’t enjoy Drum Corps, don’t go but don’t pretend to know what is best for the activity. Read the show reviews; read the post many many many people dig what is going on. Ask the members. It’s not about us old farts. We had our time let them have theirs!
It amazes me that someone thinks they can speak for what is good art and what is bad art. My daughter loves Rap and I hate it. So what, who’s right?
Art without growth and innovation is not art. When it is “directed” in a particular direction or held in the same place it becomes something less that art. Did you see Crowns show last year or better yet did you witness SCV’s magnificent portrait. Trust me the activity from an art form is just fine. If you don’t like it, check back in 10 years it will be different.
Leave the art form to the designers and performers or become a Corps director and create your own vision.
-
Since the average WC performer is a 19 year old college music major, I'd much rather have them on their "native" brass instrument. (It's true - go look it up. Not you, Lance, but the general "you.") And I still maintain the loudest corps moment I've ever experienced was the 2001 Blue Devils (on Bb's) - the end of I've Got Rhythm was so loud all you could hear was the distortion - literally.
Mike
No chance.....I can name at least 20 shows that had bigger impacts (and not meaning just volume, but actual musical impacts) than '01 Devs.
DW
-
And I would suggest you check the finals videos in '05 (Cadets), '07 (Bluecoats), and especially Phantom ('08).
I would also point out to you, concerning the Dublin show Tuesday night...it was a record attendance and I would bet that the great MAJORITY of folks attending were NOT attending their first drum corps show. They new what they were coming to see.
Don't need to, I was there (except for '08). None of those years come remotely close to the fan reactions to the shows 1-17 in '88. Sorry.....
DW
-
If kids marching today came on here and bashed stuff from the early 90s like this, it would be interesting to see the reactions.
They don't, and it's not because they often don't find the stuff from 2 decades ago to be un-entertaining. Most are respectful of those who came before them even if they don't find the shows invigorating.
They don't because they weren't there. There's no way for them to know what it was like if they never saw it live. You are really starting to reach. I marched in the 90s, but I had tapes of all the shows from '72-'90 when I was growing up and had a healthy respect for the shows that came before me. It was great to see the progression and evolution and see the differences on what corps achieved and just how difficult it is for drum corps in every generation. It gave me a healthy perspective....never once felt I needed to bash the activity.
I am not bashing the members (as you continually seem to insinuate). I'm bashing the direction that the activity as a whole is taking. What don't you understand about that?
-
they played them well enough for you when that is what they were playing..... I thought these were excellent musicians??? Shouldn't they be able to get a good sound out of G horns????
The argument against G bugles was that they were hard to play in tune, and that it was hard to recruit band students over to them. Both are flimsy arguments. I spoke with someone recently that marched in both the G and Bb era and he spoke of how it was a terrific challenge for the performer to play in tune. There is no comparison to the resistence....not doubt they produce both a bigger and brighter sound.
-
Cadets 2010 is easily my favorite show of theirs since 2005.
For the record, my list for favorite Cadets shows is this:
5. Cadets 1990
4. Cadets 2010
4. Cadets 2005
2. Cadets 1997
1. Cadets 1993
There are a lot of great shows this year, IMO. My favorite year for the top 12 in general ever is 1993, and this one is shaping up to be right there.
No 1983? 1984? I mean those two shows may have single handedly changed the activity forever...
DW
-
I'm glad this topic has sparked a lot of discussion...to be honest I really didn't think many would agree with me. I'm glad that many of you have observed the exact same thing as I.
The only thing I've heard from dissenting opinions is that I should take my ball and head to another game. Again, what kind of business sense does this make for DCI? Especially if there is a consensus that agree with me?
Just to be clear, I love the activity and what it does for kids. Its truly one of the greatest ways to spend your formative years. I really don't want to go away from the activity...the people are great (Bluecoats...see Debbie Pietrangelo, Sandy Poglisch, Marilyn Booth and Penny Pillo, Ted Swaldo, et. al.) and are like my family. I would like to see the activity produce a better product because, as we are finding out through this discussion, there definitely is something wrong. Best case scenario right now is that the activity is going through a transitional phase and they'll figure things out very soon.
The best way to prove my point in this discussion, is to point out that many who disagree have yet to say that the shows of 2010 are truly moving aesthetic experiences that excite them to the point of rabid passion. Instead, a lot of what I've read is, "Hey, you don't get it...it's passed you by....maybe you should go enjoy yourself elsewhere...."
When discussing this same point with a drum corps vet (from 20+ years ago) yesterday, I relayed a story to him from a very accomplished woodwind person that was at an event with me. He said, "Did they really just cheer because they played louder?" I said, "Yeah, its not as easy as you think...." My drum corps friend yesterday said, "You should hear the Chicago Symphony brass section play Wagner...they'll rip your head off, it's incredible." Aesthetics doesn't start or end with volume, it starts with musicality and my biggest beef in all this is that none of the corps really reach what I would call is a superior level of musicality anymore. Its a bizarre thing to say because the talent is SOOOO much better in 2010 than it ever has been. It goes back to design.
Hmmmmm, curious.
DW
-
Okay.
However, things aren't going to change back to recapture the magic as it were, "aesthetically" or not . . .which leads us right back to the "I know what's best for drum corps" argument: one most of us are destined to lose.
I'm not trying to offend with the "passing you by" statement, but what you originally wrote was a lot like how I felt about the activity before I "made my peace" with it as I described. Apologies if it came off that way.
I don't know that any of us can ever speak for the majority of the fans, no matter how much people sat on their hands at a certain show.
Having said all this: you've now stated your case.
What do you propose we do as an activity to fix things?
Judging criteria needs to be completely overhauled...that would be a start. What is accepted as excellence in design and excellence in general effect have become so blurred.
DW
G7 Thoughts/Alternatives
in DCI World Class Corps Discussions
Posted
Brasso, I think most of what people are upset about is what you mentioned....no details (the document openly admits that it is a work in progress). However if the G7 wants the rest of the DCI community to go along with this for 2011 as the document states, they're going to have to provide greater insight!
I will say it right now publicly...I won't attend a G7 "event" as stated in this document. I like competition. I like fair competition. I like to be entertained.
The only intriguing aspect to this document was allowing the fans to participate in the scoring process. It needs some tweeking for sure, but 10% of the score is great! I like this idea. There would have to be some audience education (which wouldn't be bad) about how to score. Not sure how they are going to monitor this thing through txt though. What would prevent someone in Brazil from txt'ing in a vote? This would (perhaps) force drum corps to program for the audience (which they are not doing now).
I can understand why some corps are saying the damage is already done and this may not be tenable for the future. I'd be pretty ticked too. My document states that perhaps these units and DCI should let the G7 go and form their own......"thing" leaving the drum corps to the units that actually want to be drum corps.
DW