What is missing from Drum Corps today

[xmenjeffb]

One thing has remained consistent over decades of shows and judging .

If you want to see change then change the way we reward points and what we reward them for . If DCI wants to change programming then there must be a systems change .

When the activity decided that Quality of sound was more important than just being clean the system changed to reward that . ( circa 1979/80 )

When SCV 80 could not be rewarded on the sheets for the what -The system changed for visual ( 1981 /82 )

Somewhere along that time frame i think between 80 and 81 the Gun was gone . Prior to that the excellence judges would leave the field when the gun went off leaving only the Effect judges to judge the end of the shows .

Right around 84 =Percussion changed sheets to reward more of the what , leading to major shifts in percussion arrangements as more of whole .That stemmed from the change in 81 allowing the grounding of pit equipment . Not sure exactly what year the pit area was created .Prior to that you ground equipment but it had to be inisde the front sideline .

Other changes occured later Like when DCI combined Percussion and Brass ensemble into Music Ensemble .

Returning to Overall Effect would actually be a return to complete the Effect Cycle . In the early days of drum corps there was an over all effect judge or judges .

Follow the line of change and you follow the development of what is programmed .But it was all driven by the what the activity wished to be rewarded .

If Effect is the next line of thought . And if the activity values Effect being rewarded the way an audience views the show .Then you would have to see a systems change to allow that to be rewarded and programming would change as it always has .

Now , personally i dont have a stake in this either way . But I would support discussion and trial to see if a systems change would change the outcome . The real proof would only come with a major change in the way things are scored now .

[audiodb]

Of course we're talking about design - we don't have to play semantic games here.

My comments are not intended as a "semantic game". I think it is significant (and germane to the topic) to consider more than just design.

[dustyboo]

Now, there's a person who understands where I am coming from! People who have never marched drum corps number in the hundreds of millions in the US alone! How can DCI get some more of these people to try our activity! We need the infusion of fresh blood, fresh ides, and $$$$!

Over the years, I have had many, many conversations with people who don't know what drum corps is. I used to do my best to explain, but my explainations always fall short. Then, I got an idea. Why not introduce someeone to drum corps the way it I was introduced?

So, since that day, I have talked with and taken quite a few people to drum corps competitions. Peopoe who are like I was. Not music majors. Not into the performing arts. Just ordinary people. People like my young grand-daughter, who asks me, "Gran'pa, when are we going to go to another "band-show"? People who, when they see drum corps for the first time as WE see it, are transfixed and brought a little closer to this thing we know as "drum corps heaven", the DCI Championships!

World Classs tickets are expensive. So, what do we do to get more non-drum corps people to try drum corps?

1) We can try my idea, take them kickin' and screamin' to a show.

2) We can give them tickets to a show, like I do every year now. Try giving away your Open Class 1/2 finals or Finals tickets!

3)Donate tickets to a youth organization. Try the Boys and Girls Clubs of America or pick one of your favorites.

4) Stand outside the gate sometime and check out the people who pass by. Notice who seems interested in what's going on. When the opportunity presents itself, give a ticket or two to a child, an adult, a couple, some friends, some passers-by. Then, watch and see if 10-20 years later you see them marching or volunteering, or simply attending competitions and dragging people kicki' and screamin' into the show!

I got started in drum corps because a stranger cared enough about me to give me a ticket! What is missing from drum corps today? Can you figure it out now?

Be pro-active! Give a stranger a ticket to a drum corps competition!

Just my 2 cents worth,

Ron Gunn

I thought the magic formula to getting new, fresh blood into the activity was to allow all these new rules changes. Funny, how it has had the opposite effect. How about going back to being real drum corps? In my area you can now pay $10 to go see a summer band show or $35 to go see a local drum corps show. Since there really isn't much difference anymore why would a family need to spend the extra $100 per family of four to see the same basic show?

[BRASSO]

One thing has remained consistent over decades of shows and judging .

If you want to see change then change the way we reward points and what we reward them for . If DCI wants to change programming then there must be a systems change .

When the activity decided that Quality of sound was more important than just being clean the system changed to reward that . ( circa 1979/80 )

When SCV 80 could not be rewarded on the sheets for the what -The system changed for visual ( 1981 /82 )

Somewhere along that time frame i think between 80 and 81 the Gun was gone . Prior to that the excellence judges would leave the field when the gun went off leaving only the Effect judges to judge the end of the shows .

Right around 84 =Percussion changed sheets to reward more of the what , leading to major shifts in percussion arrangements as more of whole .That stemmed from the change in 81 allowing the grounding of pit equipment . Not sure exactly what year the pit area was created .Prior to that you ground equipment but it had to be inisde the front sideline .

Other changes occured later Like when DCI combined Percussion and Brass ensemble into Music Ensemble .

Returning to Overall Effect would actually be a return to complete the Effect Cycle . In the early days of drum corps there was an over all effect judge or judges .

Follow the line of change and you follow the development of what is programmed .But it was all driven by the what the activity wished to be rewarded .

If Effect is the next line of thought . And if the activity values Effect being rewarded the way an audience views the show .Then you would have to see a systems change to allow that to be rewarded and programming would change as it always has .

Now , personally i dont have a stake in this either way . But I would support discussion and trial to see if a systems change would change the outcome . The real proof would only come with a major change in the way things are scored now .

I like your post. You come to this post thread with an accurate historical portrayal in my opinion of the changes in the judging captions. The DCI unit shows today reflect what is rewarded on the judging captions. It really is that simple. If Hops wants to know why adiences do not seem to react to shows as they have in the past, he need look no further than what is rewarded on the judging captions compared to earlier eras. This is not rocket science we are talking about here with this.

[BariBrian]

What?

Am I the only one who noticed BD sitting in chairs last year? That's not pushing creative boundries? Ditto for Cavies making machines, Bluecoats catching criminals and Crown's horses. Programs such as those weren't contemplated in the 90s and not because of Bb, amps or anything other than imagination and evolution.

BD's dance derby surely was a different conception whatever you thought about yowza. Cadets in the narration years set out to push the boundary on articulation. You can't dismiss the push just because it involved amps. It was a push.

I don't get it. I don't get where anyone can claim this activity hasn't changed much lately. Next thing you know we'll be complaining that drum corps today is too old-fashioned.

HH

Most of those things at one time or another were done by the Bridgemen in the 70's & early 80's (except for the artificial sound equipment) Get your hands on some of their DVD's and see what inovation really was. No Offence meant

[MikeN]

My comments are not intended as a "semantic game". I think it is significant (and germane to the topic) to consider more than just design.

In this case, I don't; but I'm echoing Hop's point about show design here - of course the 2009 Blue Devils *sound* different than the 2000 Blue Devils - they've got amps, synths, 1 more snare, 1 more tenor and about 16 more brass. That said, the *show* from 2000 would fit right in with the programs offered in 2009. I don't think you could say that the 1990 "Tommy" show could fit neatly in with the 2000 programs as well. I think overall the rate of real design change has slowed down.

That said, I apologize - I wasn't trying to be harsh - just trying to explain myself a little better. s'all good.

Mike

[salad315]

I like your post. You come to this post thread with an accurate historical portrayal in my opinion of the changes in the judging captions. The DCI unit shows today reflect what is rewarded on the judging captions. It really is that simple. If Hops wants to know why adiences do not seem to react to shows as they have in the past, he need look no further than what is rewarded on the judging captions compared to earlier eras. This is not rocket science we are talking about here with this.

Yeah, pretty much. While some 'innovation' has been done to spite the sheets, most of the time, corps have to balance being exciting, crowd friendly, and innovative, all while worrying about how they score. It's tough to completely ignore the judges while trying to please the fans, becuase potential members care about placement...and often take it into account when deciding where to audition.

[Richard]

I think we're getting into dangerous territory when we start to talk about gearing the sheets to be more aligned to what pleases the crowd (and I acknowledge that I've made an assumption about what some people are talking about when they mention changing the sheets). The problem is that "crowd pleasing" is absurdly ambiguous. This would also result in corps being rewarded for playing "fan favorite" music and relentless gimmicks, taking away from the excellence and execution that are currently the cornerstone of a successful (score-wise) show. It would also hinder ingenuity in show design, because corps would be more afraid to try something that might not get a positive initial audience reaction, but may end up pushing the activity in a new, better direction (e.g. Star 93).

How do you quantify something like "getting the crowd on their feet" and put it into words on the back of the sheet? Not only will this vary from judge to judge, but it will vary even more so from show to show. As much as many people on DCP like to gripe about the current judging system, it is at least defined relatively clearly. Granted, the judges have to make a personal judgement (weird right?) about how well the show on the field satisfies the criteria on the sheets, but that sure beats the hell out of "I like this, so it's getting a high score" or "This is enjoyable to me, so this corps will be in 1st in my caption". I'm sure a few judges end up judging in that manner anyway, which just means that bad judges can exist, but that's human nature.

The show that is most enjoyable is often not the best according to the sheets. This is a necessary discrepancy until someone can figure out how to universally define "enjoyable" to the point where multiple judges can reach similar conclusions.

I'm all for making modern drum corps more accessible in general, but I haven't heard a reasonable suggestion for how to go about it yet.

Disclaimer: I find modern drum corps EXTREMELY entertaining and I think they get better every year.

[audiodb]

In this case, I don't; but I'm echoing Hop's point about show design here - of course the 2009 Blue Devils *sound* different than the 2000 Blue Devils - they've got amps, synths, 1 more snare, 1 more tenor and about 16 more brass. That said, the *show* from 2000 would fit right in with the programs offered in 2009. I don't think you could say that the 1990 "Tommy" show could fit neatly in with the 2000 programs as well. I think overall the rate of real design change has slowed down.

That said, I apologize - I wasn't trying to be harsh - just trying to explain myself a little better. s'all good.

Bygones.

And yes, design did morph quicker in certain earlier periods (say, '76-'85 for visual, '67-'76 for music as examples, IMO).

I've been reading the design discussion here, and much of it does resonate with me. But I still see rule-driven changes as bigger impact. Some, of course, have affected design....an example being the tempo changes we take for granted today that were penalized under VFW "cadence" rules. Others materially affect the scope of the activity.

On occasion, my daughter asks why I'm not listening to drum corps like usual, even when I am....just in those cases, a corps somewhere in the 2004-2009 range employing voice or electronic instruments. That never happens with a recording from 2003 or earlier.

[Bydloyoho]

An incredible rumination from Mr. Hopkins.

I completely agree with his assertion that: "Music has been relegated to a role of accompanying a succession of visual statements". The winning show of 2009 makes almost no sense musically, just a series of hit points with no development. Incomprehensible to the casual listener. I'm not just aiming this at BD, by the way, but it is telling that that is the current reigning 'format' for a winning show.