Jump to content

What defines a Drum and Bugle Corps?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 84
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Well, isn't the term self-defining?

A Drum and Bugle Corps is a particular type of Marching Band.

Like a Marching Band, it MAY have color guard or other accessory members, but by DEFINITION, the only instruments allowed are DRUMS and BUGLES.

This is why it is called a Drum and Bugle Corps, duh.

If woodwinds were allowed, there would have been no special name necessary to make note of their absence, it would be called a Marching Band. If there were strings, perhaps a Marching Orchestra.

Yes, we now have Bb instruments, and they have 3 valves, but by some definitions, they may still be called bugles.

Yes we allow amplification - this does not violate the "no instruments but bugles and drums" rule, because mikes and speakers are not instruments.

Yes we allow synthesizers now. Synthesizers could technically be considered percussion because the player generates the sound by striking keys, much like a piano, which is a percussion instrument. Do I like it? HELL NO.

Is it still Drum and Bugle Corps? Yes, we still have not violated the rules that the name implies, just stretched them really far.

If we allowed woodwinds, would it still be Drum and Bugles Corps? No, it would become Drum and Bugle and Woodwind Corps a.k.a. Marching Band.

End of story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, isn't the term self-defining?

A Drum and Bugle Corps is a particular type of Marching Band.

Like a Marching Band, it MAY have color guard or other accessory members, but by DEFINITION, the only instruments allowed are DRUMS and BUGLES.

This is why it is called a Drum and Bugle Corps, duh.

If woodwinds were allowed, there would have been no special name necessary to make note of their absence, it would be called a Marching Band. If there were strings, perhaps a Marching Orchestra.

Yes, we now have Bb instruments, and they have 3 valves, but by some definitions, they may still be called bugles.

Yes we allow amplification - this does not violate the "no instruments but bugles and drums" rule, because mikes and speakers are not instruments.

Yes we allow synthesizers now. Synthesizers could technically be considered percussion because the player generates the sound by striking keys, much like a piano, which is a percussion instrument. Do I like it? HELL NO.

Is it still Drum and Bugle Corps? Yes, we still have not violated the rules that the name implies, just stretched them really far.

If we allowed woodwinds, would it still be Drum and Bugles Corps? No, it would become Drum and Bugle and Woodwind Corps a.k.a. Marching Band.

End of story.

... but there are strings in the pit now. So time for a name change? Drum and Bugle and String Corps? DCSI?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes there are strings here and there, Spirit was using a bass guitar tonight in West Des Moines, and I did not like it.

My friend and I were discussing how one couldn't tell to what degree the bass was reinforcing the contra line, and how synths could be used to enhance the fullness of the brass, etc...

Then, in that very show a bit later, we were hearing steel drums, but couldn't spot them in the pit. We concluded that they must be synthesized. How strange to not know.

This made me think about the most absurd implications of this rule. As I watched their show, distracted, I daydreamed of a corps of about 30 kids marching around the field carrying only synths, or perhaps wireless midi instruments all being piped through a central sound system. Maybe the rules say they don't even have to march, I dunno. Anyway, it's clear that a line really needs to be drawn somewhere. Where that line lies is the source of all our discontent. I would like to hear where Hopkins would draw the line. I wish I could see into the future...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

very well said, sydstranda. kudos :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:laughing::thumbup: Two thumbs enthusiastically up! Nominated for DCP Post of the Millenium...Post of the Year...Best Poster...Best Supporting Post...Best Cinematography...and if we could kill the G vs Bb debate, it would be nominated for Best Film Score, too!

"Get over ourselves"--GREAT statement! I wholeheartedly agree.

I wonder how many people over the years have been run off by some overzealous fan and former marching member with the "not marching band" attitude. I mean...geez, how obtuse can we possibly be?

"Keep it a niche activity--we don't want more fans competing for our seats!!"

Nice.

I completely agree with your comments about those fans that seem to cling to traditions, suppress change, and unwittingly relegate drum corps to a "niche activity". It deserves a wider audience and America will respond if the activity is creative and maintains its quality & personality. Also....all of us (at some point) have been victims or witness to overzealous drum corps fans who pounce on innocent newbee fans for calling the activitiy "marching band". HOWEVER, I offer this suggestion: Next time you see a Marine, go up to him or her and say, "Hey, what's it like to be in the Army?" ....then step back! :tongue:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

very well said, sydstranda. kudos :laughing:

Bus Fumes, The smell of an oncoming storm, The game, The superman Suit, The croud, The rush, The feeling when you come off the field knowing that was it, Friendships that last a life time, Peanut Butter and Jelly, basic blocks, bob barker, corps jacket, friends and family day, tan lines.

This my friends is what defines drum corps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What drum corps has are some distinctions that make corps stand out among the various types of bands.
What distinctions are those?
People get riled up after being called a "band" because they believe, and rightly so, that corps deserve a bit of distinction.
Why do corps deserve that distinction? (IOW, why are people rightly riled when someone calls corps "band"?)
But when someone calls a corps a band (especially in the media), they're not wrong, and never have been.
That can be considered a technical statement. You, like many others here (MikeD comes to mind) believe that drum corps has always been a subset of marching band. However, like many legal decisions, there is what is allowed and then there is what's right, and they are not necessarily congruent. If in light of those distinctions solicited above, how does one square these two concepts: Corps are distinct from band. Corps are the same as band.

Either they're distinct or they aren't.

(distinct: –adjective 1. distinguished as not being the same; not identical; separate (sometimes fol. by from): His private and public lives are distinct. 2. different in nature or quality; dissimilar (sometimes fol. by from): Gold is distinct from iron. 3. clear to the senses or intellect; plain; unmistakable: The ship appeared as a distinct silhouette. 4. distinguishing or perceiving clearly: distinct vision. 5. unquestionably exceptional or notable: a distinct honor.)

For corps and band to be the same, they have to have a common beginning. Otherwise they are simply different orgs that happen to look the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...