Frank Dorrities article

[Dennis Argul]

Even if you don't agree with what Frank has to write.....you have to love the way he writes it!

Thanks Frank for making us all think about things a little harder and doing what you can to help us all improve the activity!

Keep it up!

Please!!

Peace,

Dennis

[Galen]

Totally agree- I've been a part of several field groups where on-field dutting from the battery has lead to ensemble tears.

Get rid of guard counting while we're at it, please.

[Galen]

Dut should not be heard from stands. Dut should still be used as needed.

If you haven't marched, arranged, or taught a modern-day battery percussion section, then you really shouldn't speak much of it. The variables that play in to a clean attack are much different than what either a horn player might understand, or even a marching percussionist from another era could comprehend. Which is exactly why there is a strong opinion in favor of the dut from most drummers on the DCI forum about this very topic.

Most, with the exception of one to two people over there, agree that the dut should not be heard unless there is some strange effect that is intended. So, on this we can mostly all agree.

But the majority of people who say the dut shouldn't even be used at all, even unheard by the audience, are either from another era when the demands weren't the same, or are horn players, where a bad attack is much easier masked.

I'll admit I'm a horn player...

But is it really THAT hard to follow the DM and hit a drum in time?

[ahquad]

I'll admit I'm a horn player...

But is it really THAT hard to follow the DM and hit a drum in time?

Yes, it is. If there is any spread on the field at all, and everyone on the field attacks right with the visual cue of the major, the attack will be dirty to the audience. Many times you'll hear (and again, I don't like hearing them from the stands, either) duts that intentionally DON'T line up with the major, because that is the timing needed for the attack to work with the ensemble proper.

In days of old when the whole battery line was always together and most often in the same configuration, and when even sub-sections of the battery always stayed together (no "pods" like used often today), and when the battery was never spread beyond the 40's or behind back hashes, then I can understand why a dut wasn't needed. I marched those days. It wasn't as hard. I've taught in modern times, and it isn't the same.

I will end my post stating once again that I agree that duts should never be heard by the audience. But until you've marched/taught modern era, big movement and oddly-staged battery, you can't place judgment on what tool is used to create cohesive and on time attacks and sense of tempo. But, as an audience member, you should have the right to not HEAR it, for many reasons. I can't understand how this slips through many staffs and why some would even want the audience to hear it. Maybe they just get so used to it that they don't even hear it anymore. I'd think a staff wouldn't want the crowd thinking that the line needs it, even though the real-world situation is that they probably do for many reasons the crowd couldn't begin to understand unles they were out on the field. I'd much prefer to hear something played well and in time and wonder how the heck they pulled it off. So, I'm all for no audible duts. EDIT: Oh, and I'm also not "for" duts just for the sake of dutting. If it isn't needed, I don't prefer to use them. So, I'm not a "dut all the time" guy, myself, but I do see the situational need for it and can't pass judgement on when another line uses it unless I've marched a day in their bucks.

On the Dr. Beat thing... I don't understand. It's been used since late 70's to early 80's. One can still groove and play ahead or behind the beat when a constant tempo is given. I've rarely ever seen a field ensemble play consistently well when they don't use the Dr. It's all about consistency. It doesn't create robots. It is just another tool. And one that works.

Edited October 15, 2010 by ahquad

[BJenner]

I have to agree with Frank. Being an old school guy myself, I am annoyed....no better flabbergasted at the overuse of the Dr. Beat. Yes, more onus needs to be put on the drum major, the percussionists who can easily play a tap and let's preserve the hearing of our marching members.

While we are on the subject....kevlar drum heads. While the original intention was probably a noble one, why do we have snare lines that sound like they are playing on table tops instead of snare drums? JMHO, nobody elses. Just me.

[NYSkyliner]

Dut should not be heard from stands. Dut should still be used as needed.

If you haven't marched, arranged, or taught a modern-day battery percussion section, then you really shouldn't speak much of it. The variables that play in to a clean attack are much different than what either a horn player might understand, or even a marching percussionist from another era could comprehend. Which is exactly why there is a strong opinion in favor of the dut from most drummers on the DCI forum about this very topic.

Most, with the exception of one to two people over there, agree that the dut should not be heard unless there is some strange effect that is intended. So, on this we can mostly all agree.

But the majority of people who say the dut shouldn't even be used at all, even unheard by the audience, are either from another era when the demands weren't the same, or are horn players, where a bad attack is much easier masked.

It seems that the problem lies with those drummers,...oh, excuse me,...percussionists within the marching arts who don't consider themselves musicians,...or separate from musicians. Personally I consider a percussionist calling out "dut" every time his feet hit the ground the same as a horn player (who happens to be a musician,...the same as a percussionist is) calling out "hut" every time his right (or left) foot hit the ground.

But, the argument will continue so long as people want to "pontificate" and "postulate" their own "expertise" and pit one era of the activity against the other. And the stupidity of pitting one musician against another.

Mr. Dorrittie is a well known and respected "musician". Can't say I can say the same for you.

[ahquad]

Mr. Dorrittie is a well known and respected "musician". Can't say I can say the same for you.

Then you don't know me. I haven't won a grammy, but I'm degreed in music, and have medaled/won every major marching activity in existence since the late 70's, on both brass and percussion instruments, indoor and outdoor, band and corps, as a player and instructor/arranger. Can you say the same for yourself? Your sig says no.

Edited October 15, 2010 by ahquad

[Jeff Ream]

I'll admit I'm a horn player...

But is it really THAT hard to follow the DM and hit a drum in time?

if you can see the drum major.

[sunbari1]

Dut should not be heard from stands. Dut should still be used as needed.

If you haven't marched, arranged, or taught a modern-day battery percussion section, then you really shouldn't speak much of it. The variables that play in to a clean attack are much different than what either a horn player might understand, or even a marching percussionist from another era could comprehend. Which is exactly why there is a strong opinion in favor of the dut from most drummers on the DCI forum about this very topic.

Most, with the exception of one to two people over there, agree that the dut should not be heard unless there is some strange effect that is intended. So, on this we can mostly all agree.

But the majority of people who say the dut shouldn't even be used at all, even unheard by the audience, are either from another era when the demands weren't the same, or are horn players, where a bad attack is much easier masked.

If we horn players can subdivide in our heads, why can't you drummers do the same?

[ahquad]

If we horn players can subdivide in our heads, why can't you drummers do the same?

There is a huge difference in attack characteristics and how it can be masked between the two. On a drum it is also a visual attack. You don't "see" someone's tongue prepping and applying the actual attack on a horn. That adds a visual dimension that adds another level of difficulty to hitting a drum.

In addition, just because of the inherent physical properties, an attack on a drum can't be masked. Especially with the tuning/materials and staging of modern marching drums. Mylar heads of old with the low tuning better masked poor attacks. Today's drums and tuning make it so that even the most minute of timing errors makes the sound thick, since there is a rapid decay after the attack, unlike a hornline, where the majority of notes played have at least a small amount of time to the actual note before a release occurs. In addition, there are so many variations of an attack on a horn, whereas on a drum, you either hit it right on time or you don't, and that difference is recognizable both visually and audibly. On a drum, you can't "fwah" your way in to an attack and rely on others around you to hit the "dah" attack to cover those who miss it. This gives horn players a false sense of accuracy and "holier than those drummers" because it is so much harder to pick out a subpar attack from a hornline as a whole since it is so much easier to sneak in.

A hornline attack, even at its most precise, doesn't have the minimal margin of error that a drum attack does. As mentioned, individuals can "sneak" in to a horn attack of an entire line; you can't do that on a drum.

And you're assuming that you "horn players" subdivide well. Have the hornline bopp their notes playing them all very staccato and see how that works for you. If I put a stick in to the dominant hand of an entire hornline and asked them to hit a precise attack... and play just that one note together (regardless of the technique or quality of sound), I'd bet a life's savings of about $5 that they couldn't do it. And I'm not biased, as I was a horn player long before I moved to the dark side.

Edited October 15, 2010 by ahquad