Earlier changes to Drum Corps

[JimF-LowBari]

Many corps came from the "corner" in 1973.

My first drill in 1974 started from the corner. For everyone else benefit, part of the corps was just behind the backside line and part of corps just outside the (audiences) left line. Drawing a total blank for 1975 but 1976 whole corps was behind backside line. Only remember 1976 because an RCA (small Sr corps circuit) show at York, PA had a "slight" problem. Problem was a snow fence behind the back sideline that was in the middle of where the corps set up. Judges ended up not judging drill for the first 45 seconds or so while corps members played "Chinese Fire Drill" around the fence.

And Cliff, think we did a show or two where the 50 had an extra wide stripe so everyone would know which line was the 50. Well..... that was the theory anyway.

Yeah we're Off Topic, but we're discussing changes....

[MarimbasaurusRex]

Back toward the topic, I recall reading drum corps news in 75 or so with article after article about those annoying "bells" on the field. I remember doing a school essay about it, obviously on the pro-bell side of the issue. It was all percussion to me, but there were clearly many old timers who called it blasphemy. That perspective has kept me from complaining too too much about changes in drum corps. I remember how ridiculous those anti-bell people seemed to me cuz I thought keyboards were cool.

But, I definitely know people who have turned their backs and walked away because of one change or another. And I did it in 82 with the grounding of the pit. It's easy to fall in love with a certain aspect of the activity and when that changes the rush just isn't there for you anymore. I really haven't enjoyed watching drum corps since 78, and I kept marching til 81.

Personally, my main issue with so many changes, from 2 valves to synths, is that they are always done with the idea that it will make drum corps more appealing to more people, and that's a fallacy. Every "innovation" drives a certain number of people away. Not one change that has happened in my lifetime has made someone say, hey I hated drum corps before but I love it now because they added ______(insert change here).

The one aspect of drum corps that has attracted, and will always attract, audience is that there are people out there doing something that others can't. That's what drives ALL performance, from baseball to ballet. It's not the uniform or the mezzo piano control of a horn line that excites people. It's the super-human-ness of it that people find attractive. If the powers that be in drum corps ever take the blinders off and start recognizing and really selling that aspect, they might see some real growth.

People will always walk away. The question is, are more people coming in than going out? If the answer to that is no, then something really fundamental needs to change. If I had my way, there would be no more judging. That, from my perspective, is the root the problem. Drum corps is driven ENTIRELY by a subjective competition criteria that it arbitrarily creates for itself. And so, it eats itself alive and will continue to do so until one alone is left standing and crowned king of nothing.

[JimF-LowBari]

Back toward the topic, I recall reading drum corps news in 75 or so with article after article about those annoying "bells" on the field. I remember doing a school essay about it, obviously on the pro-bell side of the issue. It was all percussion to me, but there were clearly many old timers who called it blasphemy. That perspective has kept me from complaining too too much about changes in drum corps. I remember how ridiculous those anti-bell people seemed to me cuz I thought keyboards were cool.

My first hearing of "that ain't Drum Corps" was because of bells around 1975. Some of these folks had been involved with corps since the 1950s. LOL, having discovered corps the year before, my response was *shrug*. Imagine my surprise years later when I heard that early corps had glocks.

I walked away in 1992 or 1993 (can't remember) and can't say I was driven away by the changes. But what I was seeing and hearing just interested me less and less. I was in my mid 30s and had other changes going on in my life. Middle of the Hershey Jr show I just decided I had better things to do with my time and walked out.

But, I definitely know people who have turned their backs and walked away because of one change or another. And I did it in 82 with the grounding of the pit. It's easy to fall in love with a certain aspect of the activity and when that changes the rush just isn't there for you anymore.

Can understand that, the one change during my time (74-85) that ####ed me off the most was going to 2 valves. Now that beloved weird ###ed looking horn that was so different looked like every other freakin' MB horn. So much for hearing "What is THAT?" at parades. Just surprised it took so long to add the third valve.

Personally, my main issue with so many changes, from 2 valves to synths, is that they are always done with the idea that it will make drum corps more appealing to more people, and that's a fallacy. Every "innovation" drives a certain number of people away. Not one change that has happened in my lifetime has made someone say, hey I hated drum corps before but I love it now because they added ______(insert change here).

People will always walk away. The question is, are more people coming in than going out? If the answer to that is no, then something really fundamental needs to change.

Just thought these should be repeated.

Edited March 26, 2010 by JimF-3rdBari

[DAvery]

I think it's natural and expected for people to walk away from drum corps after they march. Life gets in the way sometimes. Marriage, kids, jobs - they all will take priority. After a while, when everything settles down, we look for something to fill some time. Some will return to corps, some will not. I kept up with corps for 2-3 years after I aged out. But the thing that really left me un-interested was the lack of musicianship. At the time, I was a music major and it seemed that drum corps cared less about the music than I would have liked. The biggest thing that interests me in drum corps today is the visual aspect. Probably because there is little to compare it to. A corps visual performance is entirely original, where the music is generally just a re-creation. And usually a poor re-creation.

[84BDsop]

Personally, my main issue with so many changes, from 2 valves to synths, is that they are always done with the idea that it will make drum corps more appealing to more people, and that's a fallacy.

I would think the change to upright valves on horns was more a matter of ease of playing. Grounding the keyboard in your avatar or carrying them, there's probably not THAT much different in playing method...you still have the same set of grips and the same strokes hitting the keys.

Not the same for brass of the era....playing with the thumbs isn't the easiest thing to do, and the horns weren't the easiest to hold and play (MAJOR props to 76 BD for playing Channel One on those buggers). Moving to 2 upright valves made it a lot easier to play more complex music across the board. Adding the 3rd valve gave brass ALL the notes in the scale...you still tried to find a "finger friendly" key to arrange in, but you no longer had to worry about having a lot of 3rd valve notes to write around.

[dc oldtimer]

I certainly know about a dozen or so people who have either not seen or very much limited the amount of drum corps they see due to all the changes over the years. Mostly due to the addition of dance, props and theatrics. Now granted, these are hard corps old timers who believe in "drum corps the way it was meant to be" but, I am only answering the OP's question.

[Jeff Ream]

Back toward the topic, I recall reading drum corps news in 75 or so with article after article about those annoying "bells" on the field. I remember doing a school essay about it, obviously on the pro-bell side of the issue. It was all percussion to me, but there were clearly many old timers who called it blasphemy. That perspective has kept me from complaining too too much about changes in drum corps. I remember how ridiculous those anti-bell people seemed to me cuz I thought keyboards were cool.

But, I definitely know people who have turned their backs and walked away because of one change or another. And I did it in 82 with the grounding of the pit. It's easy to fall in love with a certain aspect of the activity and when that changes the rush just isn't there for you anymore. I really haven't enjoyed watching drum corps since 78, and I kept marching til 81.

Personally, my main issue with so many changes, from 2 valves to synths, is that they are always done with the idea that it will make drum corps more appealing to more people, and that's a fallacy. Every "innovation" drives a certain number of people away. Not one change that has happened in my lifetime has made someone say, hey I hated drum corps before but I love it now because they added ______(insert change here).

The one aspect of drum corps that has attracted, and will always attract, audience is that there are people out there doing something that others can't. That's what drives ALL performance, from baseball to ballet. It's not the uniform or the mezzo piano control of a horn line that excites people. It's the super-human-ness of it that people find attractive. If the powers that be in drum corps ever take the blinders off and start recognizing and really selling that aspect, they might see some real growth.

People will always walk away. The question is, are more people coming in than going out? If the answer to that is no, then something really fundamental needs to change. If I had my way, there would be no more judging. That, from my perspective, is the root the problem. Drum corps is driven ENTIRELY by a subjective competition criteria that it arbitrarily creates for itself. And so, it eats itself alive and will continue to do so until one alone is left standing and crowned king of nothing.

great point. is all of the electronics thingies bringing in more people? If DCI is putting such a push on retaining people, I'm going to say no

[BRASSO]

Lot of times during the amps/electronics/etc debates it's brought up that Drum Corps has always changed and people have always left because of the changes. Problem is I was around for the mid 70s-mid 80s changes and I don't remember anyone leaving because of pits, marching bells, async drills, 2 upright valves, no color presentations, etc. Of course the only way to know about gripes back then was DCW and DCN so who knows. First I knew about people leaving because of changes was when show styles changed ca. later 80s/early 90s.

Anyone hear or know about fans leaving because of earlier changes?

Attendance is down since the 70's because the wholesale changes that have taken place have not met with enough popular appeal to replace the fans who left with newer fans that find the activity appealing.

Most major sports by comparison to Drum and Bugle Corps have not undergone anywhere near the scope, depth, breadth of changes that Drum Corps has undergone since the inception of DCI in 1971. Yet despite such few fundamental changes in the sports compared with DCI units, most sports like Major League Baseball, National Football League, College Basketball, College Football, etc have grown their overall national attendance numbers from what they had in 1971 compared to what they had last year in 2009.

Most sports league officials such as Commissioners, Board of Directors, etc are VERY interested in whether or not the product they produce on the field has popular appeal. They spend considerable capital in surveying fans, and with community outreach programs, and in polling to determine how they can make attending games more fan friendly, and make changes in the games so that the games are more audience friendly, ie.... shot clock in basketball, time limits between pitches, and bringing in bullpen pitchers, coaches time on the mound ( meant to speed up the game in response to national fan surveys) and dozens and dozens of other things done with the audience being the primary drivng force behind the change taking place with the product the sports league puts on the field.

DCI changes that have taken place that have fundamentally changed the activity since the 70's were never done with the audience anticipated reaction as the predominent driving force. Not in 1972... '82.....'92..... '02.... Nor in 2010.

If changes promoted do not have the audience as the fundamental barometer on why one would institute a change for field shows, then naturally one would expect that over time one would see audience attrition and then audience loss as the direct result of audience neglect in decision making policies that impact shows. And of course, this is precisely what has occurred in DCI. DCI has lost thousands of fans since DCI 's early years, and has only marginally replaced some of them with newer fans. This is quite different to other entitities, ie sport leagues, that have placed audiences in the forefront on most instituted changes in this similar time frame.

Edited March 27, 2010 by BRASSO