Duts

[skajerk]

this is correct, but have you ever had to make a unison entrance at 192 bpm while taking a 6:5? there's got to be something there to unify interpretation of timing. yeah its possible that 20 people will come in perfectly together, but why not make it a sure thing every time?

Again I say, watch the first 60 seconds Garfield's '85 opener.

[euponitone]

Again I say, watch the first 60 seconds Garfield's '85 opener.

Yeah, its pretty cool. And i guess you could even make a point saying that it could be done (this, completely ignoring the fact that their probably was some quieter vocalization - we'd have to ask), but - just because it was done in one instance by a world championship corps on finals night does not automatically validate that technique (or lack thereof) for every corps in every setting.

I know...its crazy, right???

[MikeD]

oh, the poster above me said what I was going to say but said it better (started the post took a phone call and finished the post, submit) so you could skip my first post but seeing that order matters and this is after it, its too late

and now I just wasted another minute of your life

Wait a minute...the poster above this one is....YOU! :P

[MikeD]

I did read the arguements and I would beg to differ on tempo and staging demands. Listen to and watch drum corps of the 70's and 80's where vocalization was not allowed and you will see drill demands and tempos like those of today.

I think at this point we can all agree to disagree, some do not mind them, others do and each side has valid arguements for and against.

Where in the 70's will you find anything remotely like today in "drill demands and tempos"???

[MikeD]

its a tool for maintaining and interpreting time. just like yardlines and hash marks and the guy next to you are tools for maintaining and interpreting shape and form.

NOW you have done it...you said 'hash marks'.

:P

[madscout96]

I did read the arguements and I would beg to differ on tempo and staging demands. Listen to and watch drum corps of the 70's and 80's where vocalization was not allowed and you will see drill demands and tempos like those of today.

Really?

How are they the same? I mean, I'm not saying that they weren't AS demanding as they are now. But are they demanding in the same way? Perhaps the demand was different then than it is now, even though it's just as demanding. Just a different kind of demanding. For instance, I don't know if any current drumline performers would be prepared to carry around a gigantic timpani for 15 minutes. That's a different kind of demanding.

[madscout96]

Duts is trying to do a higher degree of difficulty and not really having the ability

I disagree. Duts is a tool to help you do something better and more together with the ensemble, even if you have the ability.

no as for the faster tempos...

Slower tempos offer more exposure and corps today often avoid them, they can’t clean it as well as everything thing is magnified – so spare me the fast tempo = harder, its just different. Not harder, not easier, neither better nor worse -just different with a different demand

First of all I didn't say that faster = harder. Yes, it's different. So is slower. What about when the tempo for your whole show is in the 100 - 130 bpm range? How much "different" is there in that? Not much. I'm not a drum corps historian, but perhaps someone who was around in the 70's and even before then can clarify for me what the AL's and VFW's rules were regarding tempos for shows back then. My understanding is that back then, your whole show had to be around the 120 bpm range. Again, maybe someone can clarify that for me. But if your playing in practically the same tempo throughout the whole show, and your drumline is in the center of the field for the whole show, I can't imagine you'd have much of a need for duts even if they were legal. Even if your concert tune has a greater variety of tempo, you're still parked for it.

[whitedawn]

NOW you have done it...you said 'hash marks'.

:P

and i'd do it again, too.

ZAG.

[MikeD]

I disagree. Duts is a tool to help you do something better and more together with the ensemble, even if you have the ability.

First of all I didn't say that faster = harder. Yes, it's different. So is slower. What about when the tempo for your whole show is in the 100 - 130 bpm range? How much "different" is there in that? Not much. I'm not a drum corps historian, but perhaps someone who was around in the 70's and even before then can clarify for me what the AL's and VFW's rules were regarding tempos for shows back then. My understanding is that back then, your whole show had to be around the 120 bpm range. Again, maybe someone can clarify that for me. But if your playing in practically the same tempo throughout the whole show, and your drumline is in the center of the field for the whole show, I can't imagine you'd have much of a need for duts even if they were legal. Even if your concert tune has a greater variety of tempo, you're still parked for it.

VFW Nats had a caption called 'cadence' where you got tenths deducted if your tempo was outside of a proscribed range. I don't recall the exact numbers, but somewhere between, say, 120-132 would have been close.

[flashofthunder]

Think about it this way. If you have 18 different marchers watching the DM(that's 9 snares, 4 tenors, and 5 basses; fairly standard numbers), then there are 18 different interpretations of tempo from watching the DM's hands. Have you ever closely watched a conductor at 190 bpm? To get the level of precision required for drums is very difficult. Even though each player may be "right with the hands," there's still room for a person to be slightly behind or ahead of the beat. In the case of tight kevlar heads, the smallest difference can make something very dirty.

This problem is solved by appointing one person(usually the center snare) to watch and interpret the tempo, and then communicate through duts. A short, crisp "dut" is much harder to misinterpret than a conductor flopping his hands around.

As for saying that it was done back in the 70's...didn't corps generally have heads that were closer to animal skin than to kevlar? Those heads would generally have lower pitched, "fatter" sounds, right? The attacks could be a little bit farther apart than on kevlar heads, and it would still sound very clean.