It's changed

[drumno5]

Not really Fred. I know what I played and someone taught me how to transcribe things off of recordings so I could compare ... oh wait I taught myself how to do that :)

I don't doubt that you know what you played, and I'll take your word for it as far as your being able to transcribe music from a recording. But how can you "guarantee" that the horn books you played were "10x [that's 1000%!] harder than anything being played now," and then smugly close the book on discussion by saying "it's just the way it is?" Sorry, that's way too outrageous (dare I say pompous?) for me.

No personal disrespect intended,

Fred O.

[supersop]

I don't doubt that you know what you played, and I'll take your word for it as far as your being able to transcribe music from a recording. But how can you "guarantee" that the horn books you played were "10x [that's 1000%!] harder than anything being played now," and then smugly close the book on discussion by saying "it's just the way it is?" Sorry, that's way too outrageous (dare I say pompous?) for me.

No personal disrespect intended,

Fred O.

What criteria would you like me to site and how many pages do I get? Should I use specific shows for comparison? If so, which ones? I'm not trying to derail the thread, that's why I closed discussion, nor am I trying to cause a rift between new school and old school. It is the way it is because that's how shows are written now. Demand is in different areas, again, it is what it is. If you really want me to go that deep in this thread .. I can do that. But you can also go back and look at some of my diatribe posts on Klesch's work in 2009 or my comparisons to Bostons version of Candide a few years back. Or my long drawn out comparison of Channel One by BD in their various efforts of that production over the years.

Physically harder compared to Musically harder from a brass perspective is pretty clear cut without me having to go off the deep end. Fair enough?

Edited October 7, 2010 by supersop

[drumno5]

What criteria would you like me to site and how many pages do I get? Should I use specific shows for comparison? If so, which ones? I'm not trying to derail the thread, that's why I closed discussion, nor am I trying to cause a rift between new school and old school. It is the way it is because that's how shows are written now. Demand is in different areas, again, it is what it is. If you really want me to go that deep in this thread .. I can do that. But you can also go back and look at some of my diatribe posts on Klesch's work in 2009 or my comparisons to Bostons version of Candide a few years back. Or my long drawn out comparison of Channel One by BD in their various efforts of that production over the years.

Physically harder compared to Musically harder from a brass perspective is pretty clear cut without me having to go off the deep end. Fair enough?

Your points may be well taken, or maybe not. But in any case it's a matter of opinion, and you are certainly entitled to yours.

Your presentation of your opinion as indisputable fact, however, is hard for me to swallow. Your pedigree with Northern Aurora, Scouts and Cadets and your lengthy posts on Klesch, Candide and Channel One notwithstanding, the statement "that's no slam, it's just the way it is" is still a bit much for my taste.

We'll have to agree to disagree, I guess. Peace!

Fred O.

[JamMan]

If it's musically important, I'm fine with it. If it's just thrown in for effect, or to punctuate a drum feature, then I think it's pointless. Lots of classical music has stabs in it, so if it fits, I say go for it and play it.

This can go for hundreds of other things (swing flags, rim shots, buzz rolls, long chords, drums playing during ballads, horns not playing during percussion feature, company fronts, body movement,etc.).

[fsubone]

This can go for hundreds of other things (swing flags, rim shots, buzz rolls, long chords, drums playing during ballads, horns not playing during percussion feature, company fronts, body movement,etc.).

Yes, most stuff in DCI is optional, and if it fits the music and the show, I see no reason to not include it.

[perc2100]

Your points may be well taken, or maybe not. But in any case it's a matter of opinion, and you are certainly entitled to yours.

Your presentation of your opinion as indisputable fact, however, is hard for me to swallow. Your pedigree with Northern Aurora, Scouts and Cadets and your lengthy posts on Klesch, Candide and Channel One notwithstanding, the statement "that's no slam, it's just the way it is" is still a bit much for my taste.

We'll have to agree to disagree, I guess. Peace!

Fred O.

Not to mention "music demand" vs. "simultaneous" demand is quite a different argument. While Cadets musical arrangement of Candide might be more difficult than modern corps horn books (maybe even 1000X difficult as the oh-so-modest "supersop" stipulates), I can guarantee that Cadets 1990 visual demand is substantially less than top shows of this era. When determining difficulty of a program, you not only have to factor in the musical content but also what the individual performer is being asked to achieve visually while playing said musical book. And it is blatantly obvious that visual demand placed on the individual member now-a-days is significantly more difficult than what it was in the late 80's/early 90's.

That's no slam by any means, that's just the way it is.

[Barifonium]

And it is blatantly obvious that visual demand placed on the individual member now-a-days is significantly more difficult than what it was in the late 80's/early 90's.

That's no slam by any means, that's just the way it is.

Hence overall design around visual package and field acting/props/other things not previously associated with drum corps, to keep pushing the envelope of visual-based show evolution.

It's difficult to get the right blend for a stated theme to have the desired impact.

[jjeffeory]

Again, just my read on it, but I really do feel exposure has become much more prevalent in modern shows. Part of it is the arranging style, where horn stabs have come into vogue, which leads to great exposure in brass lines. And the other part of it is partially the new choices of music by many corps. Minimalist music leads to exposure, as it becomes smaller and more complex parts which are very exposed. This is all just my take on it, but I've listened to shows all the way through the DCI era, and I really feel like brass books keep getting harder and harder, especially when you consider the simultaneous demands placed on performers in the visual sector with all of the body movement stuff.

No way....

I understand what you're saying about minimalistic music possibly being more intricate, but brass books aren't getting harder. They've gotten easier as the hard parts are often offloaded to the pit. That doesn't generate the same level of effect that the brass would achieve correctly playing difficult passages.

Also trying and accomplishing are two distinct things. Simultaneous demands should only count if successful. Watering down the brass book in order to achieve simultaneous responsibilities doesn't cut it.

...and it's really difficult to talk about this change while making sweeping generalizations about all brass books of today. Some are better than others, some are worse... Generally the brass books aren't worthy of the players of today....

[jjeffeory]

And even back in the 80s, there are examples of corps using the pit to cover the parts that the hornline can't play, so don't try and call that some modern invention from the last decade. It's always happened.

Wait...

Uh, the pit covered parts that the hornline couldn't play... (* Because the horns literally couldn't play the notes without a third valve *)

That's pretty different than putting difficult parts in the pit to make it easier for the hornline to march more.

Uh, I like a lot of what is happening today, but generally the arranging style of many corps is not one of those things.

It's not the performers, it's the designers....

[jjeffeory]

Sorry Mike, wasn't you. But there was a lot of that back in the 70s and 80s, when a soloist would drop out of the drill for awhile before and after their solo, guess to make it easier for them.

Sounds like something that happened more in the 70s and less in the 80s. I still see corps have soloists drop out of the drill for awhile before and after their solo.... I also see the solo spot worked into the drill. It simply depends on the drill writer and when the soloist was decided upon....

I noticed this when I marched....