sburstall Posted March 3, 2008 Share Posted March 3, 2008 Let's just examine the logic for a second, shall we?100% wrong = never correct - i.e. you never defend DCI - leap to their defence, argue their cause. Does this sound like you Mike? You are the biggest DCI apologist on this forum. I don't know why you are arguing against the obvious. Agreed Ku. The only time Mike was against DCI was when there were rulings gave the impression of DCI/corps were going backwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCL_Contra Posted March 3, 2008 Share Posted March 3, 2008 I give you this point. DCA could be a viable option for the Open Class corps...except for one little thing...They (the Open Class corps) have chosen, so far, not to look toward that option. It's their choice. I don't see where anyone here has really contradicted you there. No one has said that these corps SHOULD move over to DCA. Rather that it MAY be a viable option open to them should they decide it's in their best interest to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Brace Posted March 3, 2008 Share Posted March 3, 2008 I don't see where anyone here has really contradicted you there. No one has said that these corps SHOULD move over to DCA. Rather that it MAY be a viable option open to them should they decide it's in their best interest to do so. I never indicated that anyone did contradict me. However, I get tired of hearing all the blathering about how bad DCI is. I never knew that DCI forced corps to purchase amps and mics and Bb horns. Corps themselves made the decision. When asked about the Bb/G issue, I believe Donny Allen remarked two things. First, their horns were mismatched and old and broken. This led more to poor performance on these instruments. Second, the corps seriously weighed the merits of Bb and G horns. The corps determined Bbs would be a better choice as they have a larger resale market should Pioneer eventually want to purchase or be sponsored with a newer set of horns sometime in the future. See, the corps made the decision...NOT DCI. Amplification...corps made the decisions...not DCI. And with the recent rule changes slated for 2009, corps will make decisions when and if to venture into those areas. DCI will not force anyone to purchase new keyboards, mics, etc. So, if a corps finds it too expensive to compete, they have themselves to blame. I'd be interested to see if recent corps who have gone inactive have considered launching a DCA effort. I know Marion Cadets (former Div. III corps) is attempting both a DCI and a DCA effort. Anyone else as of late? Just interested. I thnk DCAs growth is mostly coming from NEW ventures with new corps. New corps in DCI don't generally have a long shelf life...granted. It will be interesting to see how these weekenders fare when first launching into the DCA circuit. My guess is that they would be able to sustain things longer, but in the end, if a corps is badly managed and underfunded, it will fail regardless of the circuit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fran Haring Posted March 3, 2008 Share Posted March 3, 2008 (edited) I give you this point. DCA could be a viable option for the Open Class corps...except for one little thing...They (the Open Class corps) have chosen, so far, not to look toward that option. It's their choice. Once again.... and I almost can't believe I'm saying this.... I agree, Tom. Perhaps... at some point down the road.... a DCI Open Class corps will decide to go all-age and join DCA. But I honestly don't see it happening, at least for the near future. The Open Class corps have chosen to be part of DCI for a reason, I would suppose. If the situation changes for any of those corps, then it's up to them to weigh their options. And like you said, a poorly-managed corps won't last long in any circuit, no matter which they choose. Fran Edited March 3, 2008 by Fran Haring Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GuyW Posted March 3, 2008 Share Posted March 3, 2008 (edited) ....I never knew that DCI forced corps to purchase ...Bb horns. Corps themselves made the decision.When asked about the Bb/G issue, I believe Donny Allen remarked two things. First, their horns were mismatched and old and broken. This led more to poor performance on these instruments. Second, the corps seriously weighed the merits of Bb and G horns. The corps determined Bbs would be a better choice as they have a larger resale market should Pioneer eventually want to purchase or be sponsored with a newer set of horns sometime in the future. See, the corps made the decision...NOT DCI. False - stop your pro-DCI spin. I read Donny's comments here. He did NOT say that judges said that his corps would score poorly because of mismatched, old, and/or broken horns. They said his corps would not be able to score higher as long as they had G horns. Clearly, corps are forced into many decisions by DCI. Edited March 4, 2008 by GuyW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GuyW Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 "More than in a few critiques post contest, I was told that until Pioneer made the move to Bb/F, we would "come in last place in brass. The judging community does not want to hear that sound anymore". Just sayin' Donny" "Perhaps if a top six corps stayed on G's there may have been a ray of hope...I guess when youre in last place, they can say that stuff. I didnt take it as being said maliciously but it did make me think..." http://www.drumcorpsplanet.com/forums/inde...p;#entry2038499 "Oh Boy... So I think it may be time to clarify some things. These are truths... #1 The words were said by more than one brass judge, to me, personally that that "SOUND" is not what they are looking for in DCI anymore. I am telling the truth. Of course I need to keep these judges names anonymous.... So there it is... Donny" http://www.drumcorpsplanet.com/forums/inde...=109018&hl= Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 I never indicated that anyone did contradict me. However, I get tired of hearing all the blathering about how bad DCI is. Well, if you think DCI is perfect exactly as is, then don't read threads like this. Discussing even the most trivial potential improvement requires that we admit there is room for improvement - if that constitutes "blathering about how bad DCI is", then so be it. And the deeper the denial that there is a problem....the more "blathering" will be necessary before solutions can be discussed. I never knew that DCI forced corps to purchase amps and mics and Bb horns. Corps themselves made the decision. Here comes the "optional" argument. When asked about the Bb/G issue, I believe Donny Allen remarked two things. First, their horns were mismatched and old and broken. This led more to poor performance on these instruments. Second, the corps seriously weighed the merits of Bb and G horns. The corps determined Bbs would be a better choice as they have a larger resale market should Pioneer eventually want to purchase or be sponsored with a newer set of horns sometime in the future. See, the corps made the decision...NOT DCI. Oh, OK. So that whole thing about finishing "last in brass" until they switch, heard from multiple DCI judges....that's an ancillary detail not even worth mentioning? Amplification...corps made the decisions...not DCI. So amps are "optional" too? I don't see any world-class corps opting not to use them. Amplification is specifically mentioned on the judging sheets, which in itself makes it a competitive requirement. And with the recent rule changes slated for 2009, corps will make decisions when and if to venture into those areas. DCI will not force anyone to purchase new keyboards, mics, etc. What a relief! Seriously, Tom, you've been around long enough to see how many instrumentation rule changes in DCI have become prerequisites for competitive success. G/F bugles, two-valve horns, three-valve horns, Bb/F horns, tympani, mallet percussion, the pit, amps....all these things were "optional", yet all these things became requirements for competitive success. None of DCI's corps consider competitive success "optional"; therefore, they all adopted every one of these instrumentation "options". So, if a corps finds it too expensive to compete, they have themselves to blame. Interesting choice of words - "too expensive to compete". If at some point, too few corps can afford the price of DCI competition, who's fault will that be? I'd be bold enough to suggest that DCI consider changes that reduce the cost of fielding a competitive corps, and rein back on changes that increase that cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockinbrass Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 So amps are "optional" too? I don't see any world-class corps opting not to use them. Amplification is specifically mentioned on the judging sheets, which in itself makes it a competitive requirement. Does Madison use amps? I thought I heard somewhere they don't... and I'm too lazy to go look at pictures or the videos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Brace Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 Well, if you think DCI is perfect exactly as is, then don't read threads like this. Discussing even the most trivial potential improvement requires that we admit there is room for improvement - if that constitutes "blathering about how bad DCI is", then so be it. And the deeper the denial that there is a problem....the more "blathering" will be necessary before solutions can be discussed.Here comes the "optional" argument. Oh, OK. So that whole thing about finishing "last in brass" until they switch, heard from multiple DCI judges....that's an ancillary detail not even worth mentioning? So amps are "optional" too? I don't see any world-class corps opting not to use them. Amplification is specifically mentioned on the judging sheets, which in itself makes it a competitive requirement. What a relief! Seriously, Tom, you've been around long enough to see how many instrumentation rule changes in DCI have become prerequisites for competitive success. G/F bugles, two-valve horns, three-valve horns, Bb/F horns, tympani, mallet percussion, the pit, amps....all these things were "optional", yet all these things became requirements for competitive success. None of DCI's corps consider competitive success "optional"; therefore, they all adopted every one of these instrumentation "options". Interesting choice of words - "too expensive to compete". If at some point, too few corps can afford the price of DCI competition, who's fault will that be? I'd be bold enough to suggest that DCI consider changes that reduce the cost of fielding a competitive corps, and rein back on changes that increase that cost. Nope...there are no changes...only options. Corps themselves must approach options with discipline. The same discipline they try to instill in their members. Come on...not everyone can finish first (well, except those few years) and not everyone can finish 21st. Corps need to make smart decisions for their organization when it comes to choosing from these many options. The expensive part may come with fuel corps which this season may dwarf anything related to mics or amps or anything else. Food is going to get more expensive as well as it is constantly trucked around the nation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drumcat Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 Come on...not everyone can finish first (well, except those few years) and not everyone can finish 21st. And THAT is why we fail... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts