What is missing from Drum Corps today

[Lance]

Also, the same person likes to talk about "the Champion roar" of the crowd. Meaning, the distinct sound of approval the crowd gives to the corps they think should win it all. This person told me that they often tried to design moments to achieve that Champion roar from the crowd, and they were disappointed with the years his corps was not able to achieve it.

There are other reactions to go for that are just as important. If every show tried going for that, it would get tedious.

I love moments like that, of course, but thank goodness for variety.

[kickhaltsforlife]

Your right... corps designers are keeping the crowd in mind. A crowd filled with people exactly like themselves. They think if they would applaud this.. everyone would. The majority of designers are very selfish and are two into their own "art" rather than writing a product for the crowd. IMHO, drum corps is not the time for crazy abstract art that you have to think about for a few hours... or more to get it. Most people only see a drum corps show once or twice throughout the season. I only saw Cadets 2005 once. I didn't get it... the show was beyond me. UNtil I watched the DVD and started to appreciate it.

The designers CANNOT leave the crowd confused about any part of their show. One easy way is to not have a show theme. Just play some kick ### music and do some kick ### drill. But I actually like themed shows. You just have to do them "right."

Basically designers need to be more aware what the majority of fans want to see and hear. Not what them and their buddies like.

[perc2100]

There are other reactions to go for that are just as important. If every show tried going for that, it would get tedious.

I love moments like that, of course, but thank goodness for variety.

True, and I agree with you. I was merely trying to illustrate that this particular staffer/designer definitely had audience approval in mind in shows that they had a hand in (that won World Championships).

[perc2100]

Your right... corps designers are keeping the crowd in mind. A crowd filled with people exactly like themselves. They think if they would applaud this.. everyone would. The majority of designers are very selfish and are two into their own "art" rather than writing a product for the crowd. IMHO, drum corps is not the time for crazy abstract art that you have to think about for a few hours... or more to get it. Most people only see a drum corps show once or twice throughout the season. I only saw Cadets 2005 once. I didn't get it... the show was beyond me. UNtil I watched the DVD and started to appreciate it.

The designers CANNOT leave the crowd confused about any part of their show. One easy way is to not have a show theme. Just play some kick ### music and do some kick ### drill. But I actually like themed shows. You just have to do them "right."

Basically designers need to be more aware what the majority of fans want to see and hear. Not what them and their buddies like.

I can understand where you're coming from, but I TOTALLY appreciate that there are corps who also try to bring something new to the activity. Bringing something new is sometimes a "hit" (Cavaliers in the early 2000's), and sometimes its a "miss" (Cadets 2006). If all corps designers think about is "what would the majority of the audience like," I would hate drum corps. I like the variety, and appreciate the off-kilter shows, even when they miss: I don't like Cadets 2006 very much, but I appreciate that they put it out there and tried something different.

[BeachDrums]

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. 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.

I pretty much agree with the above. Last year, sometime near the start of tour I think, an annonymous person left the Crown Guard a letter. It encouraged the guard to perform with a high level of emotion, energy, excitement and showmanship. S/he stated that if they could not perform with enough energy and excitement to attract the audiences' attention, they might as well not even be on the field. The author stated that the most important thing s/he could suggest to them is to not just perform, but to "SIZZLE" (the same word used in the quote above). Crown staff generally mocked this person and his/her term "sizzle" which I think is too bad. I believe I know exactly what the author meant and I believe s/he is spot on, just like the quote above. If you can't perform your show with a high level of energy, charisma, excitement and showmanship to get the audiences' attention, to connect with them and increase their enjoyment of the show, why are you on the field? In my opinion, drum corps could use a lot more "sizzle" with their "steak."

Edited January 9, 2010 by BeachDrums

[HockeyDad]

Yet another equally valid conclusion - Cadets drumline had a bad night on Finals and the score reflected that. It's possible that all three scores from all three nights are correct.

To think otherwise would be to support "slotting", whereby if you finished second in quarterfinals you better finish second in semifinals and you better finish second in finals, otherwise something's up. And nobody wants that, right? Otherwise, the most important competition of the year is the season's first show, where the initial slotting happens, and then must remain the same the rest of the season.

[Jeff Ream]

My explanation for Phantom in '08:

I AM SPARTICUS!

Did you see me standing up in the crowd, yelling that in time with the corps? Phantom got to me, and in this instance, I think they got to the judges too! Once in a blue moon, the judges and I agree.

However, some judges don't seem to have a clue.

Example:

2009 DCI Championships 1/4 finals...... Cadets percussion score......19.30...3rd place

2009 DCI Championships 1/2 finals.......Cadets percussion score.......19.50...3rd place

2009 DCI Championships Finals............Cadets percussion score.......18.50.....7th place

Seems to me that, in the Cadets case, the Finals percussion judge was "clueless", or wanted to stick it to the Cadets! I don't know the story behind this score, but it made a big difference in the Cadets' placing at Finals.

If you look at the percussion scores and placements of the Cadets at major shows prior to Indy, you will se that their Finals percussion score and placement was not deserved.

Had the Cadets been 3rd in percussion with a 19.50, their total score would have been a full point higher at Finals, 98.20, placing them 2nd instead of 3rd.

I am not a "Cadet fan". Had that sort of thing happened to BD, SCV, Phantom, Boston, Glassmen, or any other corps, my reaction would be the same, utter disgust! I am not a "Cadet fan". Howver, it is obvious that the Cadets were not given the percussion score they deserved!

If I have seem to have a problem with judges, this is part of the reason why. They are not all impatial and they do make mistakes, errors, blunders and the like. Some judges seek to boost the scores of thier favorite corps, while some try to tear down the scores of corps they have issues with.

What can I say? Judges are human.

Ron Gunn

actually Ron, there is a whole thread devoted to the Cadets drum score, but i'll summarize....Cadets had a snare go down. it threw the kids off a lot and took a long time to recover.

[INSIDETHEFORTY]

Your right... corps designers are keeping the crowd in mind. A crowd filled with people exactly like themselves. They think if they would applaud this.. everyone would. The majority of designers are very selfish and are two into their own "art" rather than writing a product for the crowd. IMHO, drum corps is not the time for crazy abstract art that you have to think about for a few hours... or more to get it. Most people only see a drum corps show once or twice throughout the season. I only saw Cadets 2005 once. I didn't get it... the show was beyond me. UNtil I watched the DVD and started to appreciate it.

The designers CANNOT leave the crowd confused about any part of their show. One easy way is to not have a show theme. Just play some kick ### music and do some kick ### drill. But I actually like themed shows. You just have to do them "right."

Basically designers need to be more aware what the majority of fans want to see and hear. Not what them and their buddies like.

I agree with a lot of what you said. People who have seen a lot of drum corps, have marched, or go to a lot of shows can take the time to "figure out" what the corps are doing. However, most people do not have the luxury of attending 5 or more drum corps shows so that they can see the corps 3 or more times in a season. People who do not see the corps a lot need the programs the corps present to be EASILY ACCESSIBLE! Also, it has been my ezperience that when people who do not know drum corps have to read a program to get an idea of what the corps is doing, they tend to stay away from drum corps shows in the future. When corps make it difficult for people to grasp the concept of the "entertainment" the corps is offering, the people avoid the corps in the future. If drum corps is to grow, it must make a connection with average people.

Is drum corps all about music education, or is it about entertainment?

Average people do not attend drum corps competitions to be educated. They go to drum corps competitions to be entertained!

DCI....WAKE UP! ENTERTAIN the masses and the masses will throw their hard-earned $$$$ at you!

For the good of ALL drum corps,

Ron Gunn

Edited January 10, 2010 by INSIDETHEFORTY

[INSIDETHEFORTY]

actually Ron, there is a whole thread devoted to the Cadets drum score, but i'll summarize....Cadets had a snare go down. it threw the kids off a lot and took a long time to recover.

Thanks, Jeff! Another poster set me straight on the Cadets Finals drum score situation. He directed me to the posts I missed. I did a little digging on DCI.org and found a story that explained the situation on Finals night.

I stand corrected.

Thank you very much for being more tactful than I was!

Yours in drum corps,

Ron Gunn

[INSIDETHEFORTY]

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.

I find this quite amusing and tragic at the same time. Why? Many people in drum corps have been saying this for more than 20 years! It is both amusing and tragic that it took so long for someone in the DCI inner circle to begin to see the point we have been making all along!

Hopefully, this is a case of "better late than never" for the corps that are still surviving. For many corps that are no longer competing, it is too late....

Ron Gunn