Drum Corps As It Was

[rb325th]

I certainly loved the guards of those days....they were great for those of us who started in that era. However, todays guards have gone light-years past what those guards did, esp in the area of total body involvement with their performance. Yes, it's 180 degrees from the old days when the point was to NOT let your body get involved with the performance, but IMO the guards of today do an incredible job of performing and interpreting the music, and that includes equipment as well as body.

Anything an be used well...or not so well...be it brass, drums, narration, etc...within one corps there have been excellent uses of narration (e.g. Cadets 07) and not-so-excellent (e.g. Cadets 08).

The pit is to me the best change made since I marched...the colors it provides to enhance the music being presented have transformed the 'drum show' into a 'percussion show'. One thing I always DISLIKED was the way mallet parts had to be written when they were carried, esp bells. Orchestra bell are best used as a color instrument, not the incessant clanging for the entire show, as had to be done back in the 70's, as one example.

As for strings...yes. Let a corps place an amplified string section someplace; I'd love to hear Regiment do some Shostakovich with a string section.

It's not as if drum corps changed from what it was in 1971 to what is it in 2009 overnight...it HAS taken 38 years. What was drum corps like in 1933, to go back as far from 1971 as 1971 is from today.

I have to say the place we will disagree the most is when it comes to string instruments, amplification, and use of narration... That is just too, too far away from what Drum and Bugle Corp is. Sure, strings would give the ability to write for them, and integrate them in. BUT, how many Classical Scores have been performed absent a string or wind section, and performed well with using just Bugles?

Seem to recall many Corps achieving some incredible performances with G horns in my day. The composers had to work some magic, but they sure could.

Not having to carry the chimes (bells) throughout a performance is a good thing, and I agree a pit was needed. By out of control, I mean in that what is now down front is just too much in my opinion. We had a pit when I marched, the tympani's, the chimes, the marimbas were there. Maybe 6 performers?

Interpretation of the music could be done and was done before through the drill. Examples are plentiful to find, if you look at Bridgeman and the Civil War, the Circus. 27th lancers, Vanguard did a great job of that as well, along with Blue Devils, and all of the top 12 back in the late 70's early 80's. The point of the show was made in the presentation, the effect of the Drill (bad drill, bad General Effect). No rhyme or reason between the drill and the music, bad scores resulted... Your show depended on interpretation back then too.

I think what many of the "old timers" have problems with is that it is so far from what we knew. Yes it has taken many years to evolve to this point. That does not make the evolution the right thing, or that further taking it from its roots is a good thing.

I am not a purist, and recognize the positives... But Drum and Bugle Corp distinguished itself from other musical venues in its use of G Horns, Drill, and the Color Guards. We were not marching bands, we were not orchestras, we were not ballet troops with orchestral accompaniment.

Perhaps instead of football fields, Competitions should be held in Symphony hall? Just another evolutionary step... far fetched? Perhaps, but so wasn't the idea that we would ever see Bb instruments, never mind anyone even suggesting using strings, or amplification for that matter.

The similarities to the "old days" are so few now that the activity is barely recognizable to many of us. That is when evolution has gone too far.

I am not trying to knock the level of performances given, or the dedication of the kids on the field in any way shape or form. I have seen them out there performing. I know what it took to march back then, and it was a lot back then too. Starting in late fall, once a week, twice a week rehearsals, weekend camps, giving up entire summers to the pursuit, spending weeks on busses sleeping in school gyms from one end of the country to the other.

[MikeD]

I have to say the place we will disagree the most is when it comes to string instruments, amplification, and use of narration... That is just too, too far away from what Drum and Bugle Corp is. Sure, strings would give the ability to write for them, and integrate them in. BUT, how many Classical Scores have been performed absent a string or wind section, and performed well with using just Bugles?

Oh, lots have been performed that way, and it will continue in that vein. I happen to see no harm in permitting a corps to use anything it wants to create the best show it can. Doesn't mean I dislike at ALL the shows of the past.

Seem to recall many Corps achieving some incredible performances with G horns in my day. The composers had to work some magic, but they sure could.

Yes, they did...and they do today as well...which I guess is my point. To me, each era has built on what came before...I notice your marching era started in 1979...seven years after mine ended! Things you consider to be "business as usual" were not even permitted in my day.

Not having to carry the chimes (bells) throughout a performance is a good thing, and I agree a pit was needed. By out of control, I mean in that what is now down front is just too much in my opinion. We had a pit when I marched, the tympani's, the chimes, the marimbas were there. Maybe 6 performers?

Of course, ALL of this is us giving our opinions, so that's not a problem. You have yours, and I have mine. Too much? Too me...not at all. I love the contribution of the pit today. So no, to me it's not anywhere close to 'too much'. I look forward to the addition of electronic instruments this year to see what use the designers make of them.

Interpretation of the music could be done and was done before through the drill. Examples are plentiful to find, if you look at Bridgeman and the Civil War, the Circus. 27th lancers, Vanguard did a great job of that as well, along with Blue Devils, and all of the top 12 back in the late 70's early 80's. The point of the show was made in the presentation, the effect of the Drill (bad drill, bad General Effect). No rhyme or reason between the drill and the music, bad scores resulted... Your show depended on interpretation back then too.

Yes, and the interpretation is done via the visual designs today. The addition of the total body involvement with the guard has helped to improve that ability to me. I liked it then, and I like it now.

I think what many of the "old timers" have problems with is that it is so far from what we knew. Yes it has taken many years to evolve to this point. That does not make the evolution the right thing, or that further taking it from its roots is a good thing.

Well, IMO the 'roots' have led to where the activity is today..part of the history of drum corps has been it's ability and desire to change and expand, going back 1/2 a century or more. 1971 was the "year drum corps died" according to a t-shirt and Drum Corps News editorial when Madison, Garfield and the Cavies did themed shows. I saw a letter to the editor in NaiciD's great historical site of old DCN issues where a guy was complaining about the addition of the contra as it was turning the hornline into a marching band.

To me the roots and core of drum corps are not the instruments or a particular set of guard work or visual design concepts, but the experience the members and audience receive in the marching/music arena by being part of this great activity.

I am not a purist, and recognize the positives... But Drum and Bugle Corp distinguished itself from other musical venues in its use of G Horns, Drill, and the Color Guards. We were not marching bands, we were not orchestras, we were not ballet troops with orchestral accompaniment.

IMO drum corps is and always has been a marching band.

Perhaps instead of football fields, Competitions should be held in Symphony hall? Just another evolutionary step... far fetched? Perhaps, but so wasn't the idea that we would ever see Bb instruments, never mind anyone even suggesting using strings, or amplification for that matter.

Actually there were many concert hall performances back in the day. "An Evening With the Corps" was held back to the 60's in places like Carnegie Hall and the Felt Forum at Madison Square Garden, or Symphony Hall in Newark, NJ.

The similarities to the "old days" are so few now that the activity is barely recognizable to many of us. That is when evolution has gone too far.

And IMO it has yet to go far enough. As for recognizable, I see 100% the same activity at it's center that I participated in starting in 1964.

I am not trying to knock the level of performances given, or the dedication of the kids on the field in any way shape or form. I have seen them out there performing. I know what it took to march back then, and it was a lot back then too. Starting in late fall, once a week, twice a week rehearsals, weekend camps, giving up entire summers to the pursuit, spending weeks on busses sleeping in school gyms from one end of the country to the other.

Yup...I have no quibble with that description of our era...and like you I loved it. I just happen to love the corps of 2009 as well for taking what you did and built on it, as your era did with my era.

[rb325th]

Oh, lots have been performed that way, and it will continue in that vein. I happen to see no harm in permitting a corps to use anything it wants to create the best show it can. Doesn't mean I dislike at ALL the shows of the past.

Yes, they did...and they do today as well...which I guess is my point. To me, each era has built on what came before...I notice your marching era started in 1979...seven years after mine ended! Things you consider to be "business as usual" were not even permitted in my day.

Of course, ALL of this is us giving our opinions, so that's not a problem. You have yours, and I have mine. Too much? Too me...not at all. I love the contribution of the pit today. So no, to me it's not anywhere close to 'too much'. I look forward to the addition of electronic instruments this year to see what use the designers make of them.

Yes, and the interpretation is done via the visual designs today. The addition of the total body involvement with the guard has helped to improve that ability to me. I liked it then, and I like it now.

Well, IMO the 'roots' have led to where the activity is today..part of the history of drum corps has been it's ability and desire to change and expand, going back 1/2 a century or more. 1971 was the "year drum corps died" according to a t-shirt and Drum Corps News editorial when Madison, Garfield and the Cavies did themed shows. I saw a letter to the editor in NaiciD's great historical site of old DCN issues where a guy was complaining about the addition of the contra as it was turning the hornline into a marching band.

To me the roots and core of drum corps are not the instruments or a particular set of guard work or visual design concepts, but the experience the members and audience receive in the marching/music arena by being part of this great activity.

IMO drum corps is and always has been a marching band.

Actually there were many concert hall performances back in the day. "An Evening With the Corps" was held back to the 60's in places like Carnegie Hall and the Felt Forum at Madison Square Garden, or Symphony Hall in Newark, NJ.

And IMO it has yet to go far enough. As for recognizable, I see 100% the same activity at it's center that I participated in starting in 1964.

Yup...I have no quibble with that description of our era...and like you I loved it. I just happen to love the corps of 2009 as well for taking what you did and built on it, as your era did with my era.

Well you and I will obviously continue to disagree about what should be or should not be allowed, or where the evolution should stop. I do believe there have to be some limitations on this, not just for the sake of keeping it "traditional" but it also factors into how much can a Drum Corp afford to do.

I do not believe now and did not believe back then that Drum Corp needed to change in many of the ways it was. The changes began soon after I left, and I also remember they were not welcomed by all by a long shot. Still not apparently by many.

The addition of anything amplified or electric in nature, and the possibility strings in my mind is just one major step too far in the name of "evolution".

Look at baseball, it has evolved some but it is still played pretty much the same today as it always has been. Multi-billion dollar industry, that knew where to draw lines. Not the greatest analogy, but change for the sake of change is not a good thing. Change because something is broken, sure....

Most of all, I fear that they will one day destroy the activity with all the change. The expenses alone are already astronomical, you keep adding in new instruments, it will only get worse. The more you allow, the more it costs the Corps. The more it cost the Corps, the more they have to raise to remain "competitive" and keep up with the trends. Let's face it, now is not the time a lot people are thinking of spending more money or have any left over to donate to a good cause like Drum Corp.

[Hup234]

Actually, yes it can be denied, when the intent is to trash the current drum corps activity with highly stylized and rose-colored views of the past.

Thank you for making my point. Denial and rose-colored views are the glue that's holding together the last remaining five percent of what once was a great nationwide drum corps activity for all youth, experienced or not.

There's a lot to be said for denial and rose-colored views ... and you who remain in the activity as it is today should hope that it's said in time.

[MikeD]

Well you and I will obviously continue to disagree about what should be or should not be allowed, or where the evolution should stop. I do believe there have to be some limitations on this, not just for the sake of keeping it "traditional" but it also factors into how much can a Drum Corp afford to do.

I do not believe now and did not believe back then that Drum Corp needed to change in many of the ways it was. The changes began soon after I left, and I also remember they were not welcomed by all by a long shot. Still not apparently by many.

You say that change began soon after you left, yet that was in 1982. I stopped marching in 1972.

A few of the things that happened between my era and your era....

When I was marching you had to start in the left endzone and exit out the right...by your time it had totally changed. Set-piece drills were gone. Percussion were doing more than "elevator drill" by the early 80's.

When I marched NO judging was on tape...unlike your time.

We had only one-valve horns...your era was on the way to 2-valve (I forget when each voce was permitted to have 2 valves).

We could not use any mallets at all, carried or not. By your era it was very different.

Guards did VERY little actual guard work, as compared to your era.

Timpani had to be carried...no grounding at all.

We had judging captions like Cadence in the "VFW era". We had to march in a narrowly proscribed tempo range, otherwise we were open to a deduction in score.

We did not have brass and percussion analysis types of captions. Execution guys had a small "demand box" to give a demand number on their sheets. By your era it was s distinct caption done on tape.

The addition of anything amplified or electric in nature, and the possibility strings in my mind is just one major step too far in the name of "evolution".

Many here on DCP think as you do. I happen to disagree.

Look at baseball, it has evolved some but it is still played pretty much the same today as it always has been. Multi-billion dollar industry, that knew where to draw lines. Not the greatest analogy, but change for the sake of change is not a good thing. Change because something is broken, sure....

I can't think of any changes that were made because somethinng was broken...they are usually made when a sufficient number of those who decide these things agree that they would be a good idea.

Most of all, I fear that they will one day destroy the activity with all the change. The expenses alone are already astronomical, you keep adding in new instruments, it will only get worse. The more you allow, the more it costs the Corps. The more it cost the Corps, the more they have to raise to remain "competitive" and keep up with the trends. Let's face it, now is not the time a lot people are thinking of spending more money or have any left over to donate to a good cause like Drum Corp.

The more allowed...the more a corps has to control it's own spending. Few corps are using narration and the attendant miccing it requires. Have not heard a lot of micced singing.

Miccing the pit makes for a better sound and permits mallet selection that preserves the keys more than before...which will save $$$ over time, if you are only looking at the $$$ angle here.

[Cadetsnare]

MikeD,

Thank you for being a voice of reason here.

This activity, like all activities, evolves. If there are sufficient people in the activity who feel a change is warranted, then they change it. If you don't like the change, get involved with a drum corps so that your opinion will register to someone who can actually do something about it.

People who played with one valve and aged out hated the idea of 2 valves. Those who aged out with 2 valves hated the idea of 3 valves. Those who aged out playing a G horn hate the idea of a Bb horn. This concept is nothing new. It was always better when "we" did it our way. However, this activity, like all others, will continue to evolve.

See my sig...if you don't like the current direction of the activity, then get off the keyboard and go volunteer or teach...then at least your opinions will fall on ears that can do something about it. Otherwise, to quote my friend Chester Cheetah, "Blah, blah...blah blah blah".

See ya in June.

[Hup234]

"If there are sufficient people in the activity who feel a change is warranted, then they change it. If you don't like the change, get involved with a drum corps so that your opinion will register to someone who can actually do something about it."

The concept that mere involvement can make a genuine policy difference in the activity is simplistic and naive. Of course the leadership never turns down volunteer efforts (and hey, you might think of yourself as "a volunteer", but when you're out of earshot, know that management thinks of you and the other volunteers as "free help") -- and sure, you might even get an official thank-you at the annual banquet along with a nice framed certificate. But never believe for a single moment that any of your policy suggestions will matter one whit unless you're in high-up in the national power structure amongst those who long ago learned how to work far above the level of "free help".

"People who played with one valve and aged out hated the idea of 2 valves. Those who aged out with 2 valves hated the idea of 3 valves. Those who aged out playing a G horn hate the idea of a Bb horn. This concept is nothing new. It was always better when "we" did it our way."

Resistance to change is part of human nature, but that also applies to the current top leadership which refuses to acknowledge that their current elitist direction has brought national participation to its lowest level in history and caused the great majority of American youth, for which it was originally designed, to be excluded from membership.

"However, this activity, like all others, will continue to evolve."

If it isn't an improvement, it isn't evolution.

"...if you don't like the current direction of the activity, then get off the keyboard and go volunteer or teach...then at least your opinions will fall on ears that can do something about it."

Volunteering and teaching -- if that's even possible anymore considering the ongoing erosion that's blamed on everything but DCI policy -- will have no influence on decisionmaking by the leadership class which is committed to its current course despite the accelerating shrinkage. (Remember "We're knee-deep in the Big Muddy, and the Big Fool says to push on." - Pete Seeger)

"Can do" and "will do" in your activity's leadership today are galaxies apart, and the Kool-Aid drinking volunteers and teachers just keep volunteering and teaching, while the blind keep leading the blind.

[MikeD]

The concept that mere involvement can make a genuine policy difference in the activity is simplistic and naive. Of course the leadership never turns down volunteer efforts (and hey, you might think of yourself as "a volunteer", but when you're out of earshot, know that management thinks of you and the other volunteers as "free help") -- and sure, you might even get an official thank-you at the annual banquet along with a nice framed certificate. But never believe for a single moment that any of your policy suggestions will matter one whit unless you're in high-up in the national power structure amongst those who long ago learned how to work far above the level of "free help".

Tm Kviz, a DCP poster and parent of one of the Blue Stars members, got to present his decidedly (IMO) backwards-looking POV to DCI, the instructor's caucus I think, thanks to his corps director. Personally, I disagreed with just about every word of what he was proposing, but he DID get to present his views.

So it's not impossible. Not easy, to be sure, but then why should it be?

Resistance to change is part of human nature, but that also applies to the current top leadership which refuses to acknowledge that their current elitist direction has brought national participation to its lowest level in history and caused the great majority of American youth, for which it was originally designed, to be excluded from membership.

The 'original design' is utterely besides the point in 2009. The hundreds...thousands...of corps, large and small, local and national in scope, that existed...and died...over time, long before and into the DCI era are long gone...and not due to DCI. Few of those corps were involved with DCI to any great degree...most of them not at all.

So why should they DCI leadership acknowledge something that they do not believe is true at all?

Volunteering and teaching -- if that's even possible anymore considering the ongoing erosion that's blamed on everything but DCI policy -- will have no influence on decisionmaking by the leadership class which is committed to its current course despite the accelerating shrinkage. (Remember "We're knee-deep in the Big Muddy, and the Big Fool says to push on." - Pete Seeger)

"Can do" and "will do" in your activity's leadership today are galaxies apart, and the Kool-Aid drinking volunteers and teachers just keep volunteering and teaching, while the blind keep leading the blind.

Yes, volunteering and teaching the thousands of members who ARE participating..and are performing for all of those who attend shows during the summer, just as we did in our day.

Don't forget, national level corps pre-DCI were quite a bit smaller than the World Class corps of today...40 horns, 16 drums and 20 guard was a good sized corps in 1970. Corps today are double that in size, so 20 World Class corps has the membership of almost 40 decent sized class 'A' corps of my era. Class 'B' (the small local corps) often marched hornlines in the +/-20 range, with 10-12 drums and 8-12 guard.

[Cadetsnare]

Thanks for playin'....

Mike D...as always, the voice of reason. Thank you.

Edited February 27, 2009 by Cadetsnare

[pearlsnaredrummer77]

I don't think there's anything wrong with prefering the drum corps styles of the past over today's version. That's a valid point of view. Some people prefer vintage cars while others prefer modern. Does that make one person's taste more valid than the other?