How Should We Improve Drum Corps

[skewerz]

it won't let me vote for more than one..if I could, i'd vote for 4 or 5 of them...

[MikeN]

I'd say judging criteria. Reward corps for putting on shows that get the crowd on their feet, you'll get more shows that get the crowd on their feet.

Mike

[skywhopper]

There are lots of things I might change about DCI, but what this poll makes me wonder is, what is the *problem* that everyone talks about without defining it? Is it the decline in the number of corps? It's been pretty dramatic, but it's happened over decades, and I get the impression that anyone who wants to participate in a drum corps has plenty of places to go. Is it the (uncertain) decline in attendance? Shows I've been to don't seem to be doing poorly at all attendance-wise. Is it a decline in quality? I don't see that at all. Is it money? Are any of the world class corps in danger of going bankrupt? Or do they just feel like they spend too much time fundraising or what is it exactly?

[jwillis35]

As I have noted in some other threads, I don't mind the direction the activity is moving in. Synths do not bother me. Occasional narration and sounds effects are OK if done well, but can be cheesy. Sometimes drill writing can be too hard and too fragmented for one to really catch on, and often I find too much energy expensed on difficulty and flash and not enough on artistry and making sense.

But having said that, the number 1 thing DCI and the corps need to be careful about, at least in terms of on-field performance, is construction of the music book and the musical content they are selecting for their shows. It really starts and ends with music selection, music construction, and then the performance. This isn't to say that everything must be recognizable, but the music must have a wide appeal and be logically arranged for field so that when other elements are added (drill, body movement, story elements, etc.) the audience does not lose the impact, power, and passion that music can bring to this activity.

There are bigger picture items, such as keeping corps financially healthy, funding the activity in a better way, and getting grass roots organizations started to help grow the activity.

[TerriTroop]

Please, please, please, for the love of the English language, change "parody" (which is a form of humor by making light of something more serious - see VK) to "parity" (which is about equality).

I generally avoid stepping into the annoying role of internet police when it comes to spelling and grammar, but this one keeps happening and it's driving me CRAZY. (yeah yeah, short drive and all that )

Anyway, please change it? Thank you.

And now I'll go back and think about my response to the question at hand.

[TerriTroop]

My take on it: lots of those could be called the "problem," but that's only my singular opinion. However, I think we can change the activity for the good of all involved if DCI would create an environment where we can get away from judging that encourages corps to "keep up with the Joneses" or to adopt universal design mechanisms. (as an aside, I think we do have many corps who are "different" from others in certain ways, but certain types of distinguishing characteristics seem to have been abandoned out of fear of losing competitive edge. IMO of course.)

I think we should put more points in the hands of the members on the field in terms of performance/execution and fewer points in the hands of designers. I also think the idea of "General effect" needs a complete overhaul. For me, I want designers to stop worrying so much about playing to the sheets, and instead play to the audience. Sure, I bet most of them think they are doing that, but the crowd responses seem to be so weak. My opinion is that first-time viewers are often lost, and I'm willing to bet that most shows are attended by people who will only see one show that year. However, we've seen the activity encourage designs that require multiple viewings to grok what a corps is attempting to do. This does not help build the casual audience.

There is no way to put a number on audience appeal, so I don't want to go there on the sheets. I just want the ensembles out there to have enough latitude to put some good ol'-fashioned baby-throwing moments on the field without the threat of losing their competitive edge.

[Geoff]

Please, please, please, for the love of the English language, change "parody" (which is a form of humor by making light of something more serious - see VK) to "parity" (which is about equality).

I generally avoid stepping into the annoying role of internet police when it comes to spelling and grammar, but this one keeps happening and it's driving me CRAZY. (yeah yeah, short drive and all that )

Anyway, please change it? Thank you.

And now I'll go back and think about my response to the question at hand.

Done.

[Todd Tanji]

Speaking music, how about if not every corps plays strictly classical music? This year happens

to be better but many times I feel like I'm attending a pop classical marathon rather than

getting cultural variety.

[GUARDLING]

My take on it: lots of those could be called the "problem," but that's only my singular opinion. However, I think we can change the activity for the good of all involved if DCI would create an environment where we can get away from judging that encourages corps to "keep up with the Joneses" or to adopt universal design mechanisms. (as an aside, I think we do have many corps who are "different" from others in certain ways, but certain types of distinguishing characteristics seem to have been abandoned out of fear of losing competitive edge. IMO of course.)

I think we should put more points in the hands of the members on the field in terms of performance/execution and fewer points in the hands of designers. I also think the idea of "General effect" needs a complete overhaul. For me, I want designers to stop worrying so much about playing to the sheets, and instead play to the audience. Sure, I bet most of them think they are doing that, but the crowd responses seem to be so weak. My opinion is that first-time viewers are often lost, and I'm willing to bet that most shows are attended by people who will only see one show that year. However, we've seen the activity encourage designs that require multiple viewings to grok what a corps is attempting to do. This does not help build the casual audience.

There is no way to put a number on audience appeal, so I don't want to go there on the sheets. I just want the ensembles out there to have enough latitude to put some good ol'-fashioned baby-throwing moments on the field without the threat of losing their competitive edge.

Man do I hate that baby throwing phrase..lol..always have but i get your point. I think as long as any activity is judged no matter what it is, its always trying to keep up with the Jones's or whos on top. GE will and has always been a hard caption to understand BUT also to judge and I suspect will always be.

There are corps that maybe put an audiance 1st BUT I think there isnt a staff out there ( if they are honest ) that dont play to the sheets.( whatever they are in a given year )

[Zeke]

Less emphasis/weight to Visual and MORE WEIGHT TO MUSIC!!!!