Musical Cop-Out

[j.morgus]

Which is especially astounding seeing as how "Dust in the Wind" and "Carry On My Wayward Son" are such obscure and unrecognizable songs!

Kansas' performances of Dust In The Wind have a featured electric violin solo section that is a large part of the form. I was wondering what voices Spirit uses to cover this (if they do), and how does it sound?

[SF2K4]

That's what Spirit gives you, a drum corps interpretation of the song.

But less of a drum corps interpretation then if there were no bass guitars. I mean what if they did the song with bass guitars, electric guitars, and a drum set? You see my point? You may support that saying it's still an "interpretation" but it's not... it's one singer away from being a rock band... I'd rather see a song that was originally done with those instruments be done with NONE of them...

[audiodb]

I still have 2 very specific and very simple questions that have not been answered.

1) Does the 2009 electronics clarification rule listed earlier AUGMENT or REPLACE the 2008 electronics rule originally passed? The original (2008) proposal that was voted on and passed contained language specifically disallowing woodwinds being used in an electronic fashion -- this 2009 clarification rule contains no such language. So, again, does the new rule supercede or merely augment the original?

2) Were acoustic string instruments (guitar, harp, violin, whatever) legal 2 years ago (either amped or not)? (I have gotten a couple of "I think" answers to this one and I appreciate those who replied. I'd like a little more definitive answer, though )

These are honest questions -- just looking for facts.

To #2, the answer is no. String instruments were not legal, and thus still aren't (unless they have a power cord attached, apparently).

As for #1, I can make one correction to your wording above. The rule change proposal was intended to allow woodwind patches. Only samples of legal DCI instrumentation were prohibited (i.e. brass and percussion). What is disturbing is that the removal of that language would make it legal to use brass patches after all....and thus, truly double brass parts with the synth.

(I will say that I find it astonishing that it's so difficult to get simple rules questions answered like this. Ask any question about baseball or football or American Idol rules on the internet and you'll get chapter and verse answers within seconds. This, to me, is DCI's biggest failure in all this -- not making the rules of the activity accessible and painfully clear. Please note that this paragraph is a criticism of DCI administration/communication, and has nothing to do with any particular pro- or anti- rules argument)

Perhaps if the thread tops 100 pages, we'll eventually get an informed answer.

[Liam]

To #2, the answer is no. String instruments were not legal, and thus still aren't (unless they have a power cord attached, apparently).

As for #1, I can make one correction to your wording above. The rule change proposal was intended to allow woodwind patches. Only samples of legal DCI instrumentation were prohibited (i.e. brass and percussion). What is disturbing is that the removal of that language would make it legal to use brass patches after all....and thus, truly double brass parts with the synth.

Perhaps if the thread tops 100 pages, we'll eventually get an informed answer.

Thanks for the answer to #2 -- I'm kinda trusting your answer without a specific rule reference, but I'll take your word for it mainly because I'm tired of asking

As for #1, I think you're incorrect. I need to go back in this thread to find the wording of the original proposal, but it said something along the lines of -- the use of wind instruments otherwise prohibited on the field is not allowed in an electronic format. This language is not in the clarification, so I'm not sure if this prohibition is still in effect. Give me a minute to try and find that wording to show you what I'm talking about.

(Edit: Turns out I'm wrong about this last paragraph -- see my post 5 below ...)

Edited June 23, 2009 by Liam

[JamMan]

But less of a drum corps interpretation then if there were no bass guitars. I mean what if they did the song with bass guitars, electric guitars, and a drum set? You see my point? You may support that saying it's still an "interpretation" but it's not... it's one singer away from being a rock band... I'd rather see a song that was originally done with those instruments be done with NONE of them...

And Spirit is negative 70 brass and negative 30 guard and negative 30 percussion away from a rock band. Remember all those people?

It's like saying a motorcycle is two wheels away from a BMW. You're just missing out on too much.

[audiodb]

Where does he do that?

Here:

Supporters of electronics wanted to have a secret ballot.

"I think it was clear the proposal wouldn't pass," Hopkins said. "So it was a matter of having your name attached to a losing proposal. There were a lot of reasons why people vote against these proposals; some of them I respect, some I wonder about."

I think that qualifies as what you describe, "painting of the voting BOD members as being weak and not able to vote as they think best for DCI and it's participating corps".

Edited June 23, 2009 by audiodb

[jjeffeory]

Many do teach bands...some BOA and some not. I want less 'homogenizing'...permitting corps to use any instruments will see to that.

No, it's done the opposite. Now all the drum corps can be like the 4000+ high school marching bands... See how that worked? You're talking about DCI. I'm talking about the whole marching arts.

[Liam]

Continuing my post from 5 above -- I was incorrect. What I was remembering was wording from the 2007 proposal that did not get enough votes to pass

(bolding mine)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DESCRIPTION:

Rule Change– Beginning with the summer of 2007, electronic instruments can be utilized in any

performance sanctioned by Drum Corps International. These instruments cannot include any wind

instrument currently considered illegal within the activities if DCI. What can be used would

include, but not be limited to electronic keyboards and electronic drum machines. The intention

of the rule is to allow for the inclusion of those instruments within the percussion field that have

risen with the growth of electronic music.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So there was no restriction in the 2008 rule that passed about instruments but rather about the kinds of samples that can be used as audiodb stated above.

So I'm still not entirely clear, but I'll consider my two questions answered -- Thanks!!!

Edited June 23, 2009 by Liam

[j.morgus]

Well...there are lots of bands that do not compete...or much...or well...plus all of the college bands. I think that the 'lower' corps will still have a place, be they the Open class or lower placing World class...as the 'marching junkies' of various scholastic programs will still want to compete and march...even if not at the top world level.

I missed this post last night. Thanks for answering, MikeD.

Does this mean that you don't envision the "anything goes" brand of DCI and what are now Non-DCI "anything goes" marchng ensembles competeing against each other, and remaining separate?

[audiodb]

Thanks for the answer to #2 -- I'm kinda trusting your answer without a specific rule reference, but I'll take your word for it mainly because I'm tired of asking

As for #1, I think you're incorrect. I need to go back in this thread to find the wording of the original proposal, but it said something along the lines of -- the use of wind instruments otherwise prohibited on the field is not allowed in an electronic format. This language is not in the clarification, so I'm not sure if this prohibition is still in effect. Give me a minute to try and find that wording to show you what I'm talking about.

(Edit: Turns out I'm wrong about this last paragraph -- see my post 5 below ...)

But you're also correct. Found the verbage from the proposal:

Music from instruments such as electronic keyboards, synthesizers, electronic drum sets, and all

other electronic instruments are allowed given that the instrument’s performer(s) are present and

performing live and in real time.

The use of melodic, harmonic and rhythmic (musical) sampled (pre-recorded/sequenced) sounds

of human voices, wind instruments, and percussion instruments will not be allowed.

Sounds other than music (such as sound effects, and non-musical human voice) that are prerecorded

and/or sequenced (sampled) can be used without penalty. Any pre-recorded sounds

used that are copyrighted require all necessary and proper permissions be obtained for their use.

Note: For performance purposes, music (or musical) shall be defined as the organization of

melodic, harmonic and rhythmic sound through time and should only be performed live and in real

time by performers that are present and participating in the performance. Sampled sounds will be

defined as sounds that are pre-recorded and/or sequenced, and triggered by the use of an

electronic instrument(s) during a performance. Music (as defined above) cannot be sampled. All

other sounds are considered sound effects and therefore can be sampled.

Sure enough, the proposal prohibited sampling of "wind instruments". Don't know if it remained unchanged throughout the congress, but that's the way it was proposed.