What is missing from Drum Corps today

[HockeyDad]

The sad thing Jeff .......... many have been saying this for a decade. Openly. They've taken their lumps and it's even been said directly to Hop on many many occassions. Not that The Cadets are the source of the problem ... but they did start it along with a couple of other friends. The fact is, the time has come that certain members of the DCI hierarchy are finally willing to listen because they're getting bored ... not feeling the love ..... and are starting to get that the numbers are slipping because the product isn't so hot (no matter how flashy).

I agree. The post was refreshing to read, but, so many have been saying the same things on DCP and RAMD for years - maybe not as eloquently, but, just the same. Here's hoping that big money talks.

[Slow Adam]

Jim - we also went from 128 to 135 to 150 members.

[HockeyDad]

. . .but, Tim, plenty of us have been Friends of DCI, or volunteered or donated money throughout the years. . .to little effect when it comes time to draw up the rules for the powers that be.

You, yourself, saw the effects of that when the amplification rule change was proposed. . . .however, I do see your point regarding that in at least getting it to the table through the Blue Stars, even if it was summarily rejected.

I think there's a feeling that if there is a change to judging, or "what" a caption is, or so on . . .it's going to have to come from the inside out. I can donate as much as I'm able, and be on the cook truck every summer, but unless Hop, Gibbs, Weinstein or others start the ball rolling . . .as the corps are the ones that direct the judges and the direction of the activity . . .then we're all going to have no choice but vent on-line to make ourselves "heard" (such as it is here).

Then, for heaven's sake, STOP giving them your money. Will one person be noticed? No. Will 1000? Yes.

[JimF-LowBari]

Jim - we also went from 128 to 135 to 150 members.

That's why I gave myself an out by saying "stuff I probably missed"....

Except I didn't miss this one, I just plain forget.... #### 52 year old memory...

[84Cadet]

I love this topic. It is always interesting to me that a lot of us seem "bored" by the shows today. I have a few theories about why we have lost a sense of "connection" or "awe" to the shows put on by the corps these days. These comments are purely from an "audience" perspective.

1) Difficulty isn't impressive.

As musicians and performers, we spend years perfecting our craft. To us, speed equals accomplishment. We want to tell the world "look at my chops! I'm blazing fast!" Unfortunately, the world doesn't care. To most audiences, speed = boring. As a young drummer, I had a private teacher who used to tell me that "to an audience, the simplest things sound the best." It took me years to understand what he was talking about. Audiences don't think 16th note runs are impressive. If you want a standing ovation, play a whole note for 45 seconds. I saw Stevie Wonder do that on a harmonica once and the audience was throwing babies. Lets face it, gang. We all love loud whole notes more than wimpy 16th note runs.

It's the same thing visually. If you want a standing ovation, do a company front. Is a company front difficult? Not really. But audiences love them. I'm still waiting for a corps to open their show with a company front. It will be a guaranteed standing ovation in the first minute of their show. Talk about opening up with a bang!

While judges may love virtuosity, audiences tend to go nuts for the "easy" stuff. Designers need to keep this in mind.

2) Precision IS impressive.

There is nothing more impressive than seeing 150 people do something perfectly in unison. One of the things that attracted me to drum corps in the first place was that they were a LOT more precise than my high school or college band. Drum corps sweated the details. They had snap. Audiences love the Marine Corps silent drill platoon. Why? Because they perfect. And perfect is impressive.

3) Speed kills.

Unfortunately the "snap" that drum corps used to have in the 70's has been replaced by speed. The corps are too busy running around to be perfect anymore. Now they just look a bit sloppy. If we want to have greater impact on audiences, we must slow it down and tighten it up.

Also, audiences like to groove. They want to bob their heads and clap along. Drum corps don't let audiences "participate" any more. Every fun concert has a "sing along" or "clap along" segment. It makes them feel like they are a part of the show!

4) Use emotion.

To me, two of the most memorable shows from the 2000's have been by the Phantom Regiment. In 2003 they played Canon. I thought that was brilliant because when I heard it, I immediately thought about my wedding. And the tears started to flow. They made an emotional connection with me through the music they were playing. Regiment also did that in 2008. When the girl in the guard got killed and Sparticus was screaming in grief, I just lost it. Pure emotion. It will work forever.

[JimF-LowBari]

1) Difficulty isn't impressive.

2) Precision IS impressive.

3) Speed kills.

4) Use emotion.

Interesting reading your response and your sig Dave as I remember some people grumbling that DC was moving away from the general masses during the early 80s. Quotes of "music majors playing for other music majors" and "act like they want you to be impressed with their talent instead of being entertained" come to mind. And of course what has changed since makes that eras' changes pale in comparison.

Edited January 8, 2010 by JimF-3rdBari

[Lance]

I love this topic. It is always interesting to me that a lot of us seem "bored" by the shows today. I have a few theories about why we have lost a sense of "connection" or "awe" to the shows put on by the corps these days. These comments are purely from an "audience" perspective.

1) Difficulty isn't impressive.

As musicians and performers, we spend years perfecting our craft. To us, speed equals accomplishment. We want to tell the world "look at my chops! I'm blazing fast!" Unfortunately, the world doesn't care. To most audiences, speed = boring. As a young drummer, I had a private teacher who used to tell me that "to an audience, the simplest things sound the best." It took me years to understand what he was talking about. Audiences don't think 16th note runs are impressive. If you want a standing ovation, play a whole note for 45 seconds. I saw Stevie Wonder do that on a harmonica once and the audience was throwing babies. Lets face it, gang. We all love loud whole notes more than wimpy 16th note runs.

It's the same thing visually. If you want a standing ovation, do a company front. Is a company front difficult? Not really. But audiences love them. I'm still waiting for a corps to open their show with a company front. It will be a guaranteed standing ovation in the first minute of their show. Talk about opening up with a bang!

While judges may love virtuosity, audiences tend to go nuts for the "easy" stuff. Designers need to keep this in mind.

2) Precision IS impressive.

There is nothing more impressive than seeing 150 people do something perfectly in unison. One of the things that attracted me to drum corps in the first place was that they were a LOT more precise than my high school or college band. Drum corps sweated the details. They had snap. Audiences love the Marine Corps silent drill platoon. Why? Because they perfect. And perfect is impressive.

3) Speed kills.

Unfortunately the "snap" that drum corps used to have in the 70's has been replaced by speed. The corps are too busy running around to be perfect anymore. Now they just look a bit sloppy. If we want to have greater impact on audiences, we must slow it down and tighten it up.

Also, audiences like to groove. They want to bob their heads and clap along. Drum corps don't let audiences "participate" any more. Every fun concert has a "sing along" or "clap along" segment. It makes them feel like they are a part of the show!

4) Use emotion.

To me, two of the most memorable shows from the 2000's have been by the Phantom Regiment. In 2003 they played Canon. I thought that was brilliant because when I heard it, I immediately thought about my wedding. And the tears started to flow. They made an emotional connection with me through the music they were playing. Regiment also did that in 2008. When the girl in the guard got killed and Sparticus was screaming in grief, I just lost it. Pure emotion. It will work forever.

I think a lot of us could come up with lists of what we personally want to see. Mine would be different from yours in large part, and no doubt another's would be different from both of ours.

We run into dangerous territory when we try to say we speak for "the audience."

I think the best way to please the audience would be to have enough variety in all of the things you mentioned (among others) to appeal to the greatest number of tastes possible. But the problem that everybody kind of gets at when these discussions come up, no matter the decade, is that all shows are scored using the same limited criteria, which limits variety a great deal, and it always has. And this is the same for any type of artistic/athletic contest scored on a rubric.

The only way you can get what you want in this case is to financially support that which you like and not support what you don't like. If enough people agree with you, things will change. If not enough people agree with you, I guess it's best that we enjoy our CDs and DVDs from years past....and complain on dcp of course.

All of that said, I hope The Cadets really do try to actually do what Mr. Hopkins said he thinks should happen. I loved their 09 show, but I don't think it was an example of much of anything he was talking about.

[dbc03]

I love this topic. It is always interesting to me that a lot of us seem "bored" by the shows today. I have a few theories about why we have lost a sense of "connection" or "awe" to the shows put on by the corps these days. These comments are purely from an "audience" perspective.

1) Difficulty isn't impressive.

As musicians and performers, we spend years perfecting our craft. To us, speed equals accomplishment. We want to tell the world "look at my chops! I'm blazing fast!" Unfortunately, the world doesn't care. To most audiences, speed = boring. As a young drummer, I had a private teacher who used to tell me that "to an audience, the simplest things sound the best." It took me years to understand what he was talking about. Audiences don't think 16th note runs are impressive. If you want a standing ovation, play a whole note for 45 seconds. I saw Stevie Wonder do that on a harmonica once and the audience was throwing babies. Lets face it, gang. We all love loud whole notes more than wimpy 16th note runs.

It's the same thing visually. If you want a standing ovation, do a company front. Is a company front difficult? Not really. But audiences love them. I'm still waiting for a corps to open their show with a company front. It will be a guaranteed standing ovation in the first minute of their show. Talk about opening up with a bang!

While judges may love virtuosity, audiences tend to go nuts for the "easy" stuff. Designers need to keep this in mind.

I disagree that difficulty isn't impressive or that the audience doesn't think it is impressive. Now, a show with just 16th note runs would be terrible, just as a show with nothing but whole notes would be terrible. It is all about a balance. The whole notes are the payoff of the technical passages. Same goes with drill. To me, the best company fronts are the ones preceded by highly technical drill that just keeps building and building excitement until the company front where the crowd gets an emotional release from all the tension building into it.

If you don't think difficulty can impress you never witnessed the crowd reaction to the show off section of Cadets 2000. Nothing but pure "Look at all this ridiculously difficult stuff we can do"

2) Precision IS impressive.

There is nothing more impressive than seeing 150 people do something perfectly in unison. One of the things that attracted me to drum corps in the first place was that they were a LOT more precise than my high school or college band. Drum corps sweated the details. They had snap. Audiences love the Marine Corps silent drill platoon. Why? Because they perfect. And perfect is impressive.

While I agree that precision is impressive, it becomes more and more impressive as you crank up the difficulty. I wouldn't pay money to see 12 corps do shows where they march across the field at a perfect 8 to 5 playing whole notes the whole time even with absolutely perfect precision. Who cares?

There has to be a balance of precision and difficulty.

3) Speed kills.

Unfortunately the "snap" that drum corps used to have in the 70's has been replaced by speed. The corps are too busy running around to be perfect anymore. Now they just look a bit sloppy. If we want to have greater impact on audiences, we must slow it down and tighten it up.

I disagree here also... personally, I love the speed. When I got to drum corps shows I want to feel like what I am watching those kids do is super human. I remember watching my first live drum corps show ever in 2000 and just being in complete awe at the things these guys were able to do on the field. To me they were like super heroes and I knew instantly that that was something I wanted to be a part of.

No offense to the corps of old, but I just don't get that feeling from shows from the supposed "golden years" of drum corps.

Also, audiences like to groove. They want to bob their heads and clap along. Drum corps don't let audiences "participate" any more. Every fun concert has a "sing along" or "clap along" segment. It makes them feel like they are a part of the show!

This I can agree with as long as it isn't over used, however sections like this just aren't rewarded as much by the judges. I would like to see that changed so that there would be more drum corps moments like '02 Cadets Boogie Woogie Bugle Boy.

4) Use emotion.

To me, two of the most memorable shows from the 2000's have been by the Phantom Regiment. In 2003 they played Canon. I thought that was brilliant because when I heard it, I immediately thought about my wedding. And the tears started to flow. They made an emotional connection with me through the music they were playing. Regiment also did that in 2008. When the girl in the guard got killed and Sparticus was screaming in grief, I just lost it. Pure emotion. It will work forever.

I think there has been more emotion overall in the last few years and that this is an area that is improving.

[Jimisback]

I just read this post and I have to say I think it's dead on. Hop says it's from a longtime financial contributor and drum corps fan. I think these arguments hit on just about everything that is wrong with drum corps and in a round about way make perfect suggestions for what needs to be fixed.

The post:

We cannot ignore the actual competitive performances. We can add value with “instant encores” and clinics, but if the basic performances lack excitement and intrigue, the show will not be “must see”.

I spent some time ruminating on this topic over the break, particularly focused on this question of why the Cadets brand is not as hot as it once was. Suffice to say the problem is tough to describe. I spent time looking at shows from the past I consider great, and at the audience reaction: Cadets in 1984 and 1987...Madison in 1995...Star in 1993 (believe it or not). Why did they get the response that they did? I recognize that I am looking through a dinosaur’s eyes, but...I am trying to be objective. I have seen a lot of shows. I am older, and more jaded: Most of the legacy fans are. However, a big chunk of our audience is new, and they are sitting on their hands. In fact, the “golf clap”, and the half hearted standing ovation at the end of the show is now the norm. The audience’s reaction is telling us something critical about the evolution of the activity. It should be setting off alarm bells all over the place, but in fact we appear content with it.

What I see in the state of the art circa 2009:

From Hop: This came to me from one of the folks who supports YEA! financially and in an advisorial role. It is in response to an internal discusson we were having about the Cadet, DCI, and the world of music education.

The discussion is well worth sharing

On 1/2/10 5:34 PM, "George Hopkins" <hopkins@yea.org> wrote:

We need to create more show for less money! What can we do to make a DCI event a must See? There are many ideas out there but it will take the creators, leadership, and a better framework ti allow change to happen…. How can we assist the effort? What has to be done? Perhaps the Cadets need to look in the mirror?

Response from Hop's Friend:

Music is a big problem for this activity. We have a problem with WHAT is played, and we have a problem with HOW it is deployed.

o On the WHAT side – we have gone from diversity to homogeneity. It is incredible how 20th century wind band literature has become the cornerstone of what we do. To many, I am sure this is the logical evolution, and that this is the repertoire that is best adapted to the drum corps format. However, the net result is that we all sound the same. Jazz, blues, country, rock, broadway, marches, hymns: these are largely absent from our repertoire.

o On the HOW side – Music has been relegated to a role of accompanying a succession of visual statements. As a result, what it is played has been deconstructed to fit the visual format. It is rare to hear a sustained musical thought, or even a recognizable phrase. I would argue (without quantitative basis) that it is nearly impossible to build memorable, high impact shows that are primarily oriented toward visual “tricks” (not to say that there are not exceptions, just that you are not going to get 8 or 10 “great” shows a year this way). As you pointed out in the meeting, we are pretty much tapped out in terms of what drill alone can accomplish. So why is the visual side driving what we do?

Shows are engineered for competitive success, not created with an eye toward achieving an artistic vision. I know the creative process is a challenge – drum corps has always been “design by committee” and has always been an exercise in balancing physical and musical demands with effect requirements. However, some have become so adept at engineering solutions that the ultimate product is entirely devoid of excitement. These are shows that are “check the box” exercises – “we will play loud here and here, move fast here and here, do a 16th note run at this point to show that we can”. In the end, music does not work this way – sometimes you work your ### off for an entire piece, and there is no room for a break. Sometimes you perform something that doesn’t work on a micro scale, because it fits a bigger picture. I keep coming back to Star’s 1993 show – that was the closest we’ve come to our “Sacre du printemps” moment. Star’s staff had a vision, and they were going to ram it down the audience’s throats whether it worked or not. At the time, it looked like a mistake. People nearly rioted (we should be so lucky to have that kind of an impact now). In hindsight, it was a brilliant achievement, not because it was competitively successful, but because it was a complete realization of their bold vision.

We are formula driven. We have decided that the “right” (e.g., winning) show looks a particular way. Anyone who deviates from the formula is punished. Every show begins quietly, followed by a loud opening statement. Everyone has three (or four) movements. One movement must be a ballad. One movement must be more percussive in nature to feature the drum line’s capability. The closer must be “up tempo”, and usually must include recapitulation of prior thematic material. How are we any different from the 1970s, when everyone had an opener, a concert number, a drum feature, and a closer (usually a slow ballad, performed “power” style)? At least the 1970s shows had the benefit of being drawn from a diverse repertoire (it was possible to play a march in those days). To score well, you must demonstrate skill in playing at least one different “style” (since nearly everyone is playing contemporary/classical music, the usual alternative “style” is something “jazz-like”). There is no room for innovation. What about a show in one movement? What about an entire show built on Warren Benson’s “Solitary Dancer”? (yes, I know this would be a brutal disaster, but I am pushing a point). What about the Velvet Knights? Can anyone do comedy? Where is our generation’s Bobby Hoffmann? If we found one, would they have any success at all? Each corps is given a “blank sheet” and yet 95% of the time, they are coming up with the same answer. Why? Because we insist that it is so.

We do not reward effect. In fact, we punish it. This is the most profound problem I can think of with drum corps. The interests of the audience and the judging community are so divergent that I despair of solving this easily. The attitude that the audience is ignorant and cannot understand what effect really means is genuinely dangerous, and is wringing the creative life out of this activity.

I believe the audience for drum corps is actually pretty ###### sophisticated. They understand layering, nuance, vocabulary, and staging are important. But we have chosen to conflate these things with “effect”. What they are is design. It is possible (in fact common) to have great design with little effect. Our design teams are enormously skilled and are creating great designs all the time. However we are falling flat on emotional connection, on excitement, on thrills and hype. We are feeding the audience a steady diet of design-driven shows, with the (very) occasional exception of a 2009 Cadets or a 2008 Phantom Regiment. This happens on the micro scale as well – in every show, most corps will have their hype moment. But it is counterbalanced by minutes of design moments. The ratios are all wrong. We are all steak and no sizzle. I can name a dozen examples of designers running away from audience pleasing hype, backing away from volume and excitement for the sake of “other kinds of effect”. Worse, this has been going on for a decade. We have raised an entire generation of audience members to expect very little of the fun and thrills we grew up with. Maybe if they expected more (and got it) we would be “must see” TV.

To summarize (and sorry for the long ramble): We are getting what we reward. Until we change what we reward, we will get more of the same...cautious, over-engineered, generic, and generally boring shows. What we should be rewarding: risk taking; real emotional connection generated by great music performed at an outstanding performance level; in short, total drum corps ### kicking. I miss it. We all should.

Brilliant !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Jeff Ream]

Okay, yes. I agree with a lot of this. I just think that it's difficult to put an ostensibly objective score to the way a crowd reacts, and I say that especially as a performer who has played very popular works that elicit hugely different, yet positive, reactions from an audience. And it's been the same with me witnessing performances as well, of course. I think it's hust the nature of anything remotely creative...if it's good.

Lance, here's a question maybe you can pose in the DCA Forums.

Entertainment is a word on DCA sheets....ask how the judges decide what is "entertaining" and apply it to the scoring