More Complex Drum Corps, yet...

[garfield]

Perhaps tradition is more. Perhaps brand loyalty is more. I loved Madison's show because it brought back images of my all-time favorite "old school" show--Madison '75. I saw it at the US Open that year. Boy, was that show powerful. When a corps if forced to give up traditions just to be competitive, does the corps really "win" in the long run? (bottle dance, sunburst)

My mom and I watched some of the shows on the Fan Network on Saturday. When BD was finished, she turned to me and said, "None of those shows were exciting." This comes from someone who supported my joining a small local corps and had followed the Troopers for years in the 60's 70's and 80's.

I've been frustrated with the direction in which this activity is heading. It's been one of those nagging thoughts for the past several years and a few things now make sense.

1. It used to be that the emotion a person felt from a show came solely from the music and how it was played. Those impromptu standing ovations were a direct result of the goosebumps that we felt when a corps touched our hearts (Troopers sunburst, SCV bottle dance, Madison's company front). The hype that a show received came from how that corps touched the crowd. Now the corps are relying on "things" (read artificial props) to try to create the drama instead. I watch a show to see the drill and listen to the music--lose the gimmicks--so I can feel the raw emotion of the music once again.

2. With the amplification of the pit, it became obvious that shows relied on the music from the front ensemble to carry the show. While the pit played, the marching members would do fancy/fast/interesting drill and not have to worry about playing and marching at the same time.

3. The reason that soloists must be miked these days is because they cannot be heard over the amped front ensemble. Turn the amps off and let us hear them play without artificial help.

4. We understood that the tic system wasn't perfect, but it did allow for actual competition. We also understood that perfection was out of the question--it doesn't exist in any competition. The idea of a competition being judged based on spreads instead of concrete means makes it difficult to conceptualize personal and group improvement. Do straight lines and marching in step really count anymore? Exactly what must Corps B do to pass Corps A? If the answer in your mind is "clean, clean, clean", exactly what do you mean? Clean the marching? Clean the music? (Clean the uniforms?) How can a corps' staff make plans for improvement if the criteria is based solely on subjective, abstract, general ideas?

Clean the kitchen.

[BozzlyB]

Great question. I don't assume to be anywhere near an expert on this and I definitely have not been around the activity for near as long as many on this message board. So many other people can probably come up with better answers than me. But as I see it:

The changes, as some would imply, are not the result of a power grab by the people at the top of the activity to keep themselves in power.

The biggest impetus for change has been artistic expression. When the Cadets marched completely asymmetrical drill, and had an entirely different approach to show design in the 1980s, it was obvious they were on an entirely different level of artistic expression.... same with Star 93...... and I think these shows (among a few others) have had the most influence on the changes in the activity that subsequently occurred.

I think the important people in the activity today genuinely think it is better than it was 10/20/30 years go. Is it perfect?, no... but the corps have more leeway to design the type of show they want. I know some people have said they think all shows are too much the same nowadays..... but that is a matter of opinion.... I think we have the biggest variety in show design we have ever had. Compare Crown/Cadets/Bluecoats and Blue Devils shows.... all completely different..... and they affect and entertain me in completely different ways.

Having said that, do the people in charge of the activity want complete artistic freedom, and disregard for the traditions of drum corps?..... no I don't think so. Woodwinds, for example, are not popular among nearly all of them because of not only tradition, but practicality. A balance must be struck between artistic freedom and tradition/practicality.... and this is what I think the "rule-makers" are trying to achieve..... and this is why I think much of the change in drum corps over the past 40 years has occurred.

I agree with most of what you've said, except that. I think artistic freedom is being stifled, not encouraged in this activity. It's become quite evident that you have to follow a very clear cut formula to be successful, and if you vary too far from that formula you get spanked. That isn't freedom to design what you want, that is a very clear message being sent that you either agree that this is what makes a good drum corps show and design accordingly, or suffer the GE consequences.

Edited August 3, 2010 by BozzlyB

[Tez]

I agree with most of what you've said, except that. I think artistic freedom is being stifled, not encouraged in this activity. It's become quite evident that you have to follow a very clear cut formula to be successful, and if you vary too far from that formula you get spanked. That isn't freedom to design what you want, that is a very clear message being sent that you either agree that this is what makes a good drum corps show and design accordingly, or suffer the GE consequences.

Maybe you are right to a certain extent. I do wish there was even more variety....... but the two shows that I deem go most "against the grain" of all the other shows this year (BD and SCV) seem to also be the two least popular. If the "formula" you speak of is the approach to show design that most corps have, then why is BD winning so easily with an entirely different approach? If BD is the "correct" formula, then what about everyone else? How could Cadets show be scored as well as it is when their visual and musical program is completely different from BD's?

And what about the Madison Scouts? They completely changed their show design from previous years, and are taking a vastly different approach than others (as in, not the formula), but yet they have greatly improved their standing from last season. I think we have seen that many different types of shows can compete just fine in today's DCI.

Edited August 3, 2010 by Tez

[WOOHOO]

To comment on the OP, it obviously doesn't matter how loud the crowd cheered for scouts and cavies, as they aren't tied for first. Seeing as this is a competitive activity, and there is no applause-o-meter on the jumbotron, crowd reaction seems moot.

BTW, I was in Atlanta, and Blue Devils were far and away the best.

[Fran Haring]

Hey, olde timers...even DCA corps use amps now.

In DCA competitions, DCA corps can, and have, used electronics/sound effects during the non-judged portion of their shows and are allowed to do so under the current rules (actually have been allowed to do so for years), without penalty.

IMO, several of them have used the electronics/voice/whatever quite effectively over the years.

In 1984, Les Cascadeurs amped their pit for their entire show, and took a two-point penalty at DCA Prelims and Finals.

In 1985, Empire Statesmen used an electric guitar during their entire show, and took a two-point penalty at any DCA show they were in.

Sooo... since DCA corps began using electronics in 1984..... I would say to you "younge-timers" (and Tom):

Hey, even DCI corps use electronics now.

Edited August 3, 2010 by Fran Haring

[IanKShields]

Do you ever get tired of coming on here and telling people how wrong they are? Seriously, it seems as though whenever a person reports their observation you blast them for daring to speak for the audience. No wonder why some people are reluctant to post a review. They don't want self-appointed guardians of thought criticizing their opinions.

He didn't blast anyone. He brought up a valid question, you took it as an affront against the sacred "audience", and you blasted him.

Why not try to address the question instead?

After all, a lot of people DO act as though "the audience" were some kind of perfectly reasonable, predictable thing whose tastes never change, and which never makes mistakes in judgement or has something weird for breakfast that day.

Any performer can debunk that nonsense in a split second.

Edited August 3, 2010 by IanKShields

[dcpacheco]

The biggest impetus for change has been artistic expression. When the Cadets marched completely asymmetrical drill, and had an entirely different approach to show design in the 1980s, it was obvious they were on an entirely different level of artistic expression.... same with Star 93...... and I think these shows (among a few others) have had the most influence on the changes in the activity that subsequently occurred.

You have articulated what I have been thinking for a couple of days now. Cadets and Star have influenced drum corps more than any other groups. The problem is that for every "breakthrough" show such as Cadets '87 with Appalachian Spring, you get an overshoot, such as Cadets when they did Copland Sym #3, or Star with "Medea". As a result, corps have gone further out on the ledge in search of new heights, when not many corps are technically proficient enough to sell such shows.

[MikeD]

could crown just play any old thing and still get the same reaction by making a crown?

if not, wouldn't that mean music has something to do with the crowd reaction along with the form...just maybe?

Hey! Crown stole the band drill I wrote in 1977! I had the band make a crown to "Crown Imperial".

Hmmm..I wondered where that old reel-to-reel video-tape went!

[N.E. Brigand]

It obviously doesn't matter how loud the crowd cheered for Scouts and Cavies, as they aren't tied for first. Seeing as this is a competitive activity, and there is no applause-o-meter on the jumbotron, crowd reaction seems moot.

That doesn't necessarily follow. Perhaps the strong reaction for Scouts and Cavs helped moved the judges to score them a little higher than they otherwise would have. (Or perhaps not. My point is: we don't know either way.)

[WOOHOO]

That doesn't necessarily follow. Perhaps the strong reaction for Scouts and Cavs helped moved the judges to score them a little higher than they otherwise would have. (Or perhaps not. My point is: we don't know either way.)

If that is true, then they would have at least moved up in placement, which they didn't. Either way, completely not my point. This is a competitive thing, not a "please the uninformed" thing.