Synthesizers in drum corps

[Liam]

You want to focus on this one section that's it? Okay, focusing!

That and I want you to focus on the one part of the argument. Not everything said has to be viewed as all-encompassing for or against electronics. Some things can be agreed upon or not on their own merits without relation to the overall argument.

[Jeff Ream]

This is what we were just discussing which was cost:

FISCAL IMPACT: (How does this financially affect individual corps and the DCI organization?)

The expenditures a corps will have for electronic percussion will vary. One should plan $5000 --

$10,000 to get into the game, and as the comfort level increases, add on equipment would be a

possibility.

The cost is related to the acquisition of capital items and should be considered as an expense over

3-5 years based on depreciation schedules. Does this make the initial outlay any easier? Well, that

depends on whether one was to use cash or finance the price tag.

Either way, there is a cost, but it is not extreme. The Cadets for example, spend, $35,000 every

three to four years to replace uniforms (In the old days, every 10-15 years)..

Remember now, the use of these technologies is not mandatory. Good is god and bad is bad. All

one has to do is witness a few band shows to see this truth in action.

of course it's not mandatory. its just that everyone uses amps and Bb now....but it's optional

[Jeff Ream]

Focus ... focus .....

thanks Yoda

[SpiritofAtlanta99]

of course it's not mandatory. its just that everyone uses amps and Bb now....but it's optional

Is that DCI's fault?

[Jeff Ream]

Is that DCI's fault?

well yes, because DCI is the member corps. why vote something in if you dont want it used en masse?

even more so, like with amps, why put it on the sheets? if its on the sheets, not having it could be that one little area that keeps you from going to the top.

drum corps has always been about keeping up with the joneses. when one corps starts getting new toys, all the others do too. when one corps starts using asymetrical drill, so does everyone else. one corps ground tympani, so does everyone else. the list goes on and on.

to not use the new stuff is perceived to be bad, and DCI, being the member corps, allows that perception to flourish in their marketing of said new toys

[CrunchyTenor]

Hi, SOA99,

(If I knew your name, I'd address you that way, but this will do for now.)

I'm glad to see you quoting the proposal. That means you have accepted the challenge of addressing issues specific to the actual text.

Now, going a back a few posts (like I can keep up!), someone asked about the cost of a set of tympani. I'm thinking (i.e., my opinion) that if you have a set of 4 or 5 already, you're usually not going to be replacing all of them at the same time unless you specifically make a decision to do so. Usually, that's for a start-up. Existing corps are going to repair and replace as needed.

Making a synth purchase right now, in the first year, is probably going to be higher than the regular maintenance on existing equipment. Think of the initial purchase of Bb/F brass for corps switching from G brass. Corps went from replacing as needed to replacing the whole choir. Now that we're 9 years down the road, corps are back in the position of replacing brass as needed again.

My position, and opposition, to a lot of the reasoning for legalizing amplification, and now electronics, is that we haven't really seen any of the proposed benefits...yet. The only one I have noticed is that some pits are starting to use less of an "outdoor" stroke on the keys. Most of them are still bating the crap out of them. We've yet to see a reduction in pit instruments. From that position, amps and electronics have only added to the costs instead of reducing them.

These proposals (including any key brass) were usually touted as allowing new corps to form, and an influx of new members to populate those corps. We haven't seen this effect at all. In fact, we've seen more corps fail. I will stipulate that it wasn't necessarily these rule changes that caused these corps' failures, but where are the corps that were supposed to form that would have replaced the failures?

Other rule changes like incresing the membership limits to 135 then 150 certainly helped the existing top corps, but haven't helped the smaller corps and may have hurt them as the bigger groups gobble up more of the kids with the talent and finances to march.

The pro-synth people say to give them a chance. But we were also told that the instructors who supported the adition of syths were "experts", and that the incorporation of electronics into drum corps would be relatively seamless. Yet, here we are mid-way into the season, and there are still balance issues. Either they are overpowering, or you can't hear them at all. Neither is a benefit.

I've been listening to electronics in marching band for over 20 years. I've heard them used in some great bands, and I have never cared for the sound. I can't see myself embracing it in drum corps if it's just going to be more of the same.

IMO, drum corps wasn't broken, and this is no fix.

Comment?

Garry in Vegas

[SpiritofAtlanta99]

Oh please. The proposal was posted specifically to support the argument the DCI's intended audience was the high school (younger) crowd. Nothing more. Nothing less.

All you have to do is read the proposal and the agree or disagree that that was DCI's intended audience for this change.

That's Step 1. Step 2 is that Jeff claimed that he doesn't see that as having happened. His experience is that even the high school kids around him didn't like it. So his conclusion was that this rationale for passing the proposal turned out not to be accurate. Doesn't mean that electronics are bad or that there aren't other good/accurate rationales for them, just that this ONE rationale for their use has turned out to be faulty.

So you can 1) argue that the proposal says no such thing and Jeff and others are misinterpreting it, 2) agree that the proposal says that but argue that Jeff's evidence is anecedotal, 3) agree that Jeff's eveidence is real but argue that it is insufficient to draw that conclusion, or you can 4) agree with Jeff's conclusion but argue that the other rationales presented in the proposal (creative freedom, etc) are still sufficient to support electronics on the field.

None of those 4 arguments harms your overall position one bit -- However, all them require that you ACTUALLY READ THE PROPOSAL.

Any other response to this particular sub-thread is foolish.

AUDIENCE IMPACT: (How will this affect our audience and their perceptions of the activity?)

When looking at this question, we have to determine the audience of yesterday, today, and

tomorrow.

Yesterday --- The Classic Audience of 1975 that continues to dominate some of today’s

conversation will not like this. These people want drum corps the way they remember it and I am

very appreciative of this thought process. I too like drum corps as it was and is, but I am also

aware that something needs to change.

This addition would change that product. The problem in catering to these people --- they are a

diminishing group in terms of numbers. Personally, I love them, I want to make them leap from

their seats, but for the sake of tomorrow, and we cannot use this class of people only as the

opinion makers for our performing groups.

For the sample of kids sitting around Jeff that didn't like what they saw or heard, i'm sorry and I wish that weren't the case--but that's a really small sample of the 2 million students that the proposal is appeasing.

[SpiritofAtlanta99]

Hi, SOA99,

(If I knew your name, I'd address you that way, but this will do for now.)

I'm glad to see you quoting the proposal. That means you have accepted the challenge of addressing issues specific to the actual text.

Now, going a back a few posts (like I can keep up!), someone asked about the cost of a set of tympani. I'm thinking (i.e., my opinion) that if you have a set of 4 or 5 already, you're usually not going to be replacing all of them at the same time unless you specifically make a decision to do so. Usually, that's for a start-up. Existing corps are going to repair and replace as needed.

Making a synth purchase right now, in the first year, is probably going to be higher than the regular maintenance on existing equipment. Think of the initial purchase of Bb/F brass for corps switching from G brass. Corps went from replacing as needed to replacing the whole choir. Now that we're 9 years down the road, corps are back in the position of replacing brass as needed again.

My position, and opposition, to a lot of the reasoning for legalizing amplification, and now electronics, is that we haven't really seen any of the proposed benefits...yet. The only one I have noticed is that some pits are starting to use less of an "outdoor" stroke on the keys. Most of them are still bating the crap out of them. We've yet to see a reduction in pit instruments. From that position, amps and electronics have only added to the costs instead of reducing them.

These proposals (including any key brass) were usually touted as allowing new corps to form, and an influx of new members to populate those corps. We haven't seen this effect at all. In fact, we've seen more corps fail. I will stipulate that it wasn't necessarily these rule changes that caused these corps' failures, but where are the corps that were supposed to form that would have replaced the failures?

Other rule changes like incresing the membership limits to 135 then 150 certainly helped the existing top corps, but haven't helped the smaller corps and may have hurt them as the bigger groups gobble up more of the kids with the talent and finances to march.

The pro-synth people say to give them a chance. But we were also told that the instructors who supported the adition of syths were "experts", and that the incorporation of electronics into drum corps would be relatively seamless. Yet, here we are mid-way into the season, and there are still balance issues. Either they are overpowering, or you can't hear them at all. Neither is a benefit.

I've been listening to electronics in marching band for over 20 years. I've heard them used in some great bands, and I have never cared for the sound. I can't see myself embracing it in drum corps if it's just going to be more of the same.

IMO, drum corps wasn't broken, and this is no fix.

Comment?

Garry in Vegas

If you don't like the electronics okay, but drum corps has other fans that this may appeal too. It's not as if drum corps is trying to push out the old, they just stated they wanted to be "COOL" cause that's what they think will get the attention of this generation's youth.

Edited July 16, 2009 by SpiritofAtlanta99

[CrunchyTenor]

I too like drum corps as it was and is, but I am also

aware that something needs to change.

Why? It wasn't broken. We weren't being picketed by all the HS band synth players demanding inclusion.

For the sample of kids sitting around Jeff that didn't like what they saw or heard, i'm sorry and I wish that weren't the case--but that's a really small sample of the 2 million students that the proposal is appeasing.

Jeff can only speak of what he personally witnessed. You can't extrapolate either way, buy I doubt they were the only group of drum corps eligible fans with this opinion.

If you don't like the electronics okay, but drum corps has other fans as well.

Really? That's your complete response to my whole post?

I put that as a qualifier for my personal position, but what about the previous 7 paragraphs? Any comment on the "dog and pony show" aka George's justification?

Garry in Vegas

Edited July 16, 2009 by CrunchyTenor

[Jeff Ream]

yet SOA DCI has done NO marketing to reach out to kids to see if this is what they really want.

and lets be honest...while kids are the future members, the ##### in the seats that spend THOUSANDS of dollars on drum corps...tickets, cds, dvds, sponsoring kids....are that audience george so loves to put down anytime he can