We need the bone!

[Bruckner8]

Well that seemed a little rude.

I said closer too. Please, take offense to something I actually said.

You may be right about a difference in articulation, but that could be taught out of a section. I was referring more to the tone quality of the instruments, and I respectfully disagree with your assessment of the old G's being darker. To me, the low brass of the old lines was much brighter than todays lines. Brightness meaning presence of overtones in the sound.

You said "more accurately represents"...I took that as equivalence, since trombones sound nothing like any G bugle nor Bb marching instrument I've stood in front of. My point is: It was so shocking to read, that it may as well been equivalence.

Have you ever played in a Tuba ensemble? It's always obvious who the trombone players are, b/c their articulation is "more distinct" and their sound more "cold."

More overtones....here we go...my favorite subject (harmonic series/intonation/spectrum).

Which ones? More doesn't mean brighter...depends on what there's more of! Assume a Bb trumpet playing low C and a trombone playing tuning Bb (exact same pitch). I bet the trombone spectrum will have more overtones (or the same, but probably not the other way around, unless the trpt is something special), but we'll agree that the trumpet is brighter.

Why?

[Hrothgar15]

You tell 'em, Hrothgar.

Yeah, these snide remarks get old pretty fast.

[atlvalet]

Well, that seemed a little rude.

I am saying that, in my opinion, the bone is closer to the old G baritones than todays baritones. You may disagree with that, but if you do agree with it then adding bones would make the corps sound more old school.

Harps? Bassoons? These instruments are inappropriate because:

1. you can't march with one effectively.

2. you certainly couldn't look good while moving with one.

3. are not brass instruments, and wouldn't blend with the ensemble well.

4. are not traditional.

Reason 4 applies to trombones, and probably reason 2 to a lesser extent. Saying that bones are the same as harps and bassoons in this context is what we call in a real debate, a logic fallacy.

Perhaps you could take a cue from Zentropa on how to disagree in a civilized manner, or better yet, actually offer an argument as to why you disagree.

If I wanted to ruin something, I'd suggest that we use bassoons instead of rifles next year. That would most certainly ruin the bassoons anyway.

Don't get pedantic on me with your logical fallacy silliness. I don't accept your context, hence no fallacy.

If you want someone to argue the academic merits of how a trombone sounds vs. other instruments, that's fine. However, it seems like an implicit suggestion for adding trombones to drum corps. So you may as well be talking about saxophones, basoons, et al since that would be another step towards band. But maybe you'd be happy with that?

[tommyfromhowardst]

Don't say NO to trombones!!! Say no thank you.

[709]

Don't get pedantic on me with your logical fallacy silliness. I don't accept your context, hence no fallacy.

If you want someone to argue the academic merits of how a trombone sounds vs. other instruments, that's fine. However, it seems like an implicit suggestion for adding trombones to drum corps. So you may as well be talking about saxophones, basoons, et al since that would be another step towards band. But maybe you'd be happy with that?

I don't want drum corps to be bandAnyone that does should go take a long walk off a...well I guess it doesn't matter how the long the cliff is, but they should definetly throw themselves off a cliff.

You make gigantic assumptions about my point of view that are baseless in my opinion. I was certainly not seriously intending that DCI should add trombones, though I think they would be more appropriate than synthesizers, as well as harps and bassoons. Maybe that is how my posts appeared to you, and I apologize for not being clear.

In any case, I stand by EVERY WORD of my initial response to your response. It is a logic fallacy to jump to these conclusions. Adding these instruments would mean entirely different things to the activity; they are not the same, in the least.

I am not sure what my intention was for starting this thread, aside from the fact that the tone quality of a trombone would be a welcome addition to a drum corps these days, as I believe it would make the current corps sound more like the old corps in regards to tone quality in the low end. Just my opinion, though, like a lot of you, I do have a few pieces of paper that say I am an expert in related fields to this discussion.

Edited August 22, 2009 by 709

[709]

You said "more accurately represents"...I took that as equivalence, since trombones sound nothing like any G bugle nor Bb marching instrument I've stood in front of. My point is: It was so shocking to read, that it may as well been equivalence.

We have a difference of opinion in terms of the tone quality of these instruments. Fine. Variety is the spice of life, I guess. However, I hardly think that more accurately represents means equivalence. My opinion also, so take it or leave it.

Have you ever played in a Tuba ensemble? It's always obvious who the trombone players are, b/c their articulation is "more distinct" and their sound more "cold."

Trombone players may have a different technique as a rule, yet they still play in drum corps, to varying levels of success I'm sure. So when you say that trombonists have a cold sound or more distinct articulations when they are playing a euphonium (I'm assuming you mean euph, because of the ensemble you mention) , the first thing that comes to mind is, 'okay, so what?' Trombonists play in drum corps already, so this seems to me like it might be a moot point.

More overtones....here we go...my favorite subject (harmonic series/intonation/spectrum).

Which ones? More doesn't mean brighter...depends on what there's more of! Assume a Bb trumpet playing low C and a trombone playing tuning Bb (exact same pitch). I bet the trombone spectrum will have more overtones (or the same, but probably not the other way around, unless the trpt is something special), but we'll agree that the trumpet is brighter.

Why?

I think brightness is a measure of high overtones. A trumpet/soprano will always be brighter than a tuba, because it will have more high overtones, though the tuba may be very bright for a tuba by having more high overtones than other tubas. Lets not compare the overtones of instruments with drastically different pitch orientations, as it is useless to this debate. What I attest is that a Bb trombone is a brighter sound (in a good way) than a Bb marching baritone or euphonium. I think that any difference in articulation could be fixed through a change in approach to the attacks, but I admit that as a bass bone you probably have a leg up on me and the rest of the yahoos on here in this particular debate.

However, expertise is never an excuse for being rude. I don't understand how it could ever be a better option to act like a jerk to another human being than to do the opposite. Lets have a debate, that is healthy and constructive. But as soon as you become rude or mean about making your point, you lose credibilty, which in your case is very sad, because you seem like a very knowledgable person that I would enjoy discussing this with if you could just try to be a little more civil.

[SF2K4]

... that's what she said?

(we had Connery but I felt this was necessary anyway )

[pianolover1]

If I wanted to ruin something, I'd suggest that we use bassoons instead of rifles next year. That would most certainly ruin the bassoons anyway.

THe way some people play the bassoon, you might be doing the world a big favor. Nothing worse than an amateur sound on a basssoon, oboe, or violin.

[Bruckner8]

We have a difference of opinion in terms of the tone quality of these instruments. Fine. Variety is the spice of life, I guess. However, I hardly think that more accurately represents means equivalence. My opinion also, so take it or leave it.

Amen. So was my original post...I never attacked you. I just vehemently opposed the trombone angle, where you seem to fancy it. I can't control how you feel when you read words here. My approach was "Are u nuts? I play trombone and I don't even want them...and here's why" in a funny way, so I thought.

Trombone players may have a different technique as a rule, yet they still play in drum corps, to varying levels of success I'm sure. So when you say that trombonists have a cold sound or more distinct articulations when they are playing a euphonium (I'm assuming you mean euph, because of the ensemble you mention) , the first thing that comes to mind is, 'okay, so what?' Trombonists play in drum corps already, so this seems to me like it might be a moot point.

Yes, trombone players show up to drum corps, and I spend all summer smoothing out their articulation, and warming up their sound. But they always play in tune better than everyone else! Trombone is so special because if its purity in "conicalness." Can't even be replicated by wrapping it up so much, even though 1979 Madison tried (they had tromboniums). I only mentioned my "paper" in trombone so you'd know I'm not biased. I'd be interested in your papers, too. I like to get to know the credentials of people on DCP.

I think brightness is a measure of high overtones. A trumpet/soprano will always be brighter than a tuba, because it will have more high overtones, though the tuba may be very bright for a tuba by having more high overtones than other tubas. Lets not compare the overtones of instruments with drastically different pitch orientations, as it is useless to this debate. What I attest is that a Bb trombone is a brighter sound (in a good way) than a Bb marching baritone or euphonium. I think that any difference in articulation could be fixed through a change in approach to the attacks, but I admit that as a bass bone you probably have a leg up on me and the rest of the yahoos on here in this particular debate.

That brightness you're so fond of WON'T WORK, I'm telling you! And I LOVE the idea of having another color to work with!! It would stick out for the two reasons I mentioned: articulation and coldness (brightness). OK, it might work if you're 1995 Madison, or 1987 Bluecoats, or 1984 Blue Devils,and had lots of them. But even modern BD is 100% Euphs!! They didn't even have the "brighter" baris, let alone the "brightness" you hold so dear.

What you want is a different hornline, which is totally cool, and I'd love to hear your thoughts on that. Something like a "Chase" trpt qtet kind of show, w/o Euphs and w/o tubas. Something with completely bright sounds, trombones, baris, mellos and trumpets, ONLY. I'm TOTALLY INTO IT.

However, expertise is never an excuse for being rude. I don't understand how it could ever be a better option to act like a jerk to another human being than to do the opposite. Lets have a debate, that is healthy and constructive. But as soon as you become rude or mean about making your point, you lose credibilty, which in your case is very sad, because you seem like a very knowledgable person that I would enjoy discussing this with if you could just try to be a little more civil.

Again, ya lost me here, but that's ok. I'm sorry if it came out that way. Happens all the time. I can't seem to help it, even when I try.

[atlvalet]

You make gigantic assumptions about my point of view that are baseless in my opinion.

Sure I may have, but the title of your thread is, and I quote, "We need the bone!"

So please forgive me for thinking you wanted to see trombones in DCI. I don't know what gave me that idea to begin with.