BozzlyB Posted December 1, 2007 Share Posted December 1, 2007 I hate the talking through the mic, because it's amplified. When you "talk", you have to all talk (think godfather bd). If you want to say something, you say it in unison, and that has an entirely different effect than one voice. If the voices are a choir, that's cool. If it's one person, rather loud, so be it. If it's someone using human voice in a mic to be heard, it's an unnatural addition to the soundscape. The main reason is that if you want the corps to be heard and/or talk/sing/shout together, they can't do anything but that. This creates an overall effect that is unachievable with microphones and amps.If it's singing, the whole existance of drum corps has been to use the choir of brass instruments in lieu of the "real" instrument. That's the whole frickin' point. It's taking whatever music and adapting it to the brass choir. To me, it violates the sensibilities of the art form when you eschew that concept away with the use of an entirely different instrument, the human voice. And don't forget -- if all of the brass players are talking, they aren't playing. You can't do that too long. With a mic, you can have a girl in pumps and a dress singing her heart out in the foreground of a brass choir -- the same brass section that is the point of drum and bugle corps. The point, the idiom itself really, is about translating music through the brass sound. It always has been, and always will be. As this gets violated, so does the idiom. Drum corps is defined by its instrumental characteristics. Of course, it's brass and percussive sound. Any time something is introduced to the ensemble that changes these signature characteristics, you violate the idiom, in my opinion. Finally, if you wanted to, you could add trombones, sousaphones, and any brass instrument, and it wouldn't violate my sensibilities. I know that there's no good reason to add a souz, and trombones, well, bleh. But at least it would still be brass. Amplified vocals are a new voice, literally, and I don't care for it because it's amped. Great post, everything I wanted to say but cooler. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted December 1, 2007 Share Posted December 1, 2007 If the voices are a choir, that's cool. If it's one person, rather loud, so be it. If it's someone using human voice in a mic to be heard, it's an unnatural addition to the soundscape. That's basically how I feel as well. I have enjoyed some uses of acoustic vocals over the years (1984 Freelancers' Born Again is one of my favorite drum corps songs of all time, with it's unforgettable blend of singing and horns). Run those voices or any others through electronic amplification, and it becomes a jarring, problem-laden distraction from the music, in my opinion and experience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drumcat Posted December 1, 2007 Share Posted December 1, 2007 First, I love BAC 2000. However, IMO, the singing in the show kind of received a "free pass" from the drum corps community because there was so much excitement about the overall success of the show. It picked up momentum as the season progressed and nearing the end of the season, when it seemed like a top 5 placement was a definitive reality, the crowd response was simply over the top. In reality, the singing was okay at best. However, (1) It wasn't amplified and (2) I think everyone so badly wanted to see BAC finish top 5 that the criticism was fairly light. IMO, if they performed the same ballad now and amplified it, they'd be crucified by DCPers, much the same way Crown was when they performed the ballad from Rent. Back then, vocals were used so sparingly it didn't create a lot of controversy because it wasn't viewed as a "threat" to the drum corps tradition in the manner that amplification is now viewed as a threat. In today's drum corps environment, the two together – amplification and vocals – are almost always the ingredients for broad-based criticism. Even worse, if the two are used by The Cadet's, it's beyond criticism because it gets down right ugly. Just my two cents. +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichCranford82 Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 That's basically how I feel as well. I have enjoyed some uses of acoustic vocals over the years (1984 Freelancers' Born Again is one of my favorite drum corps songs of all time, with it's unforgettable blend of singing and horns). I'm glad you brought up the 84 Freelancers, they were the first one I thought of when I read this thread, one of my all-time favorite shows and the perfect example of how well voice CAN work in a show - WITHOUT amplification of course! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madscout96 Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 I'm against amplified voice, and dont' have much of a problem with unamplified voice. The reason is because without amplification, the voice is extremely limited. There would be a real hard cap put on vocals and what a corps could do with it. It's been like that from the early 80's (?) through 2003. People attend drum corps shows to see and hear brass and percussion and guard and visuals. They don't come to hear voice. When the voices are unamped, there's a big limit on voice that is to my satisfaction (and to the satisfaction of many others). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hrothgar15 Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 What about something like the African King in Velvet Knights 1988? Was that over the top? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 Do you hate the talking, or do you hate the talking into a microphone? What's the difference, in your mind? Speaking into a mic makes it better, as it is easier to balance against the rest of the corps. There was no speaking permitted at all, then there was (and is). As long as it is permitted, miccing should be an option. It also permits great moments like the singer in the Cadets '06 and the vocal from "Rent" in Crown '04. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slow Adam Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 Speaking into a mic makes it better, for me, Mike Davis, as it is easier to balance against the rest of the corps. There was no speaking permitted at all, then there was (and is). As long as it is permitted, miccing should be an option. It also permits great moments for me like the singer in the Cadets '06 and the vocal from "Rent" in Crown '04. You're always asking people not to speak for the masses, Mike. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowtown Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 I’m just frighten by new things, why it’s about to be 12:45 on Monday December 3 2007, it’s never been that before – someone, please come and get me out from under my desk when it passes... but then it will 12:46 – make it stop Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToferVis Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 (edited) I guess all i have to say is... "Amen" please don't....penalize me for that Edited December 3, 2007 by ToferVis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.