MikeD Posted July 15, 2008 Share Posted July 15, 2008 Would you please clarify this statement? Are you talking cost to purchase? Cost to maintain? Lower net cost for sure, and the ability to remain current with manufacturing improvements by selling the horns after a couple of years to the tens of thousands of bands and buying new ones. When any key brass passed (and it was obvious that it would be Bb/F, and not Db or something weird), several people did an analysis of the pricing of G brass and Bb/F brass from Dynasty and Kanstul, and compared that to Yamaha as well.Purchasing a set of 70 G brass worked out to be about $20-40K less. What sold the idea to DCI was the resale concept. Most of the corps want to sell complete sets, some break them up. Which if I recall was a list-to-list comparison. With G horns they were paying list or close...the economies of manufacturing scale with Bb/F provide a lot more discounting, esp buying in quantity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martybucs Posted July 15, 2008 Share Posted July 15, 2008 IMO squad-based marching was easier than that of today, even with ticks. Not surpisingly, I disagree with this remark. I don't think sqaud-based marching drills were easier than that of today. I don't necessarily think they were harder, either. Different? Yes. Today's designs are very intricate and require a lot of practice to pull off the designs, the little guys on the designer's computer screen or graph paper do, with ease. I marched long enough to log in about 10 years of non-squad based drills and the biggest challenge was getting to your set on time and back then, you still weren't allowed to "jazz" run or scurry as I like to call it. Of course, maintaining the form into each set requires constant attention. Squad-based drills also require constant attention. Although the cadence and step are precisely uniform, it takes a lot of practice to learn to keep the cadence and step size uniform. Keeping files, fronts and wheels, etc. laser straight takes hours and hours of practice. When I look at the video of my old junior corps from 1970 Eastern States Championship on YouTube, I'm amazed at how straight and exact every maneuver is and we weren't even one of the top corps. That was a skill you don't see today. (I know, everyone is glad those drills don't exist anymore.) However, I would be hard pressed to say one style is easier than the other, having marched both styles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted July 15, 2008 Share Posted July 15, 2008 Not surpisingly, I disagree with this remark.I don't think sqaud-based marching drills were easier than that of today. I don't necessarily think they were harder, either. Different? Yes. Today's designs are very intricate and require a lot of practice to pull off the designs, the little guys on the designer's computer screen or graph paper do, with ease. I marched long enough to log in about 10 years of non-squad based drills and the biggest challenge was getting to your set on time and back then, you still weren't allowed to "jazz" run or scurry as I like to call it. Of course, maintaining the form into each set requires constant attention. Squad-based drills also require constant attention. Although the cadence and step are precisely uniform, it takes a lot of practice to learn to keep the cadence and step size uniform. Keeping files, fronts and wheels, etc. laser straight takes hours and hours of practice. When I look at the video of my old junior corps from 1970 Eastern States Championship on YouTube, I'm amazed at how straight and exact every maneuver is and we weren't even one of the top corps. That was a skill you don't see today. (I know, everyone is glad those drills don't exist anymore.) However, I would be hard pressed to say one style is easier than the other, having marched both styles. We did not rehearse anywhere close to the time that is put in today. Yes, the old videos do look clean, even, as you say, for a corps not even at the top. Why? Because it was just simpler back then. The slower tempo, the linear designs, and the entire activity was just not as complex as today. Note: it was not worse by any stretch, IMO...just less complex. Also...it was not easy to do what we did...I just think today's demands are more for the MM. Heck, just marching backwards today is something we had little experience doing. Maintaining distance and form with today's visual designs, changing direction at 200 BPM as they do today? Backwards, forwards, sideways, etc? I marched in the old style, and I have taught both...up to and including the current time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martybucs Posted July 15, 2008 Share Posted July 15, 2008 We did not rehearse anywhere close to the time that is put in today. Yes, the old videos do look clean, even, as you say, for a corps not even at the top. Why? Because it was just simpler back then. The slower tempo, the linear designs, and the entire activity was just not as complex as today. Note: it was not worse by any stretch, IMO...just less complex. Also...it was not easy to do what we did...I just think today's demands are more for the MM. Heck, just marching backwards today is something we had little experience doing. Maintaining distance and form with today's visual designs, changing direction at 200 BPM as they do today? Backwards, forwards, sideways, etc? I marched in the old style, and I have taught both...up to and including the current time. As usual I don't agree with everything you say here. I'm too bored with the discussion to elaborate any further on it, as probably you are too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted July 15, 2008 Share Posted July 15, 2008 As usual I don't agree with everything you say here. I'm too bored with the discussion to elaborate any further on it, as probably you are too. Kind of a "Groundhog Day" feeling sometimes, isn't it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martybucs Posted July 15, 2008 Share Posted July 15, 2008 Kind of a "Groundhog Day" feeling sometimes, isn't it! Yes. Funny - I was watching a groundhog in our yard munching on the grass while I was having my coffee this morning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hsreed Posted July 15, 2008 Share Posted July 15, 2008 And the match ends. Next topic: Compare the viability (assuming drum corps should not be profitable) and growth potential of more corps VS focused talent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobybos Posted July 15, 2008 Share Posted July 15, 2008 On a different example: You mean that I can't buy a ticket to the symphony or the opera and hear "La Boheme" or Beethoven's 9th or Tchaikovsky's Piano Concerto #1 performed just as they were when they were premiered? No. The tuning of today's modern instrument's is finer. The timpani will be a modern pedaled timpani drum (in most cases). The only part of that performance that will be as old as the composition is the string instruments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martybucs Posted July 15, 2008 Share Posted July 15, 2008 And the match ends. Next topic: Compare the viability (assuming drum corps should not be profitable) and growth potential of more corps VS focused talent. In a draw. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apoch003 Posted July 15, 2008 Share Posted July 15, 2008 And the match ends. Next topic: Compare the viability (assuming drum corps should not be profitable) and growth potential of more corps VS focused talent. Why can't there be both? If I can teach a white man to dance, why can't I teach a noob to make music? 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.