What is the difference between.....

[Piper]

I ask this question out of pure ignorance because I was never in a band in my life. I was "To the Manor born" so to speak. To me a band director is someone who is very well educated in music (hopefully) and can impart that knowledge unto others. A drum corps director is more like a CEO who is mainly focused on administrative issues and lets the staff take care of the technical matters (and yes I know there are exceptions). Having never been on the other side of the fence I thought that there may be some people out there in DCP land who could provide some useful input.

Edited October 30, 2010 by Piper

[Michael Boo]

Good question. Band directors have to have music education degrees, so they are quite educated. A few have gone on to become corps directors, but most corps directors have come from drum corps, with a large number of those having been marchers and a few who weren't marchers, but started out as instructors. There aren't many of those, as most instructors were marchers at one time.

A very big difference, though, is that band directors with marching programs also have concert programs, which are run over a longer length of the academic year than the marching bands. Corps directors—unless they are part-time—have the marching season as their main focus. Recruiting members, hiring instructors and raising funds are all geared towards the marching season. While band directors move from the marching season to indoor activities such as concert band, jazz band and pep band, corps directors finish one season and pretty much start planning the next, as recruitment for the next season has to start as soon as the previous season is over.

Also, while band directors still have to raise funds via parents and booster organizations, they get a lot of their funding from the community via taxes and school district allotments. Corps directors generally can't depend on a steady flow of funding from another entity to pay in part for their programs. While many schools have had to cut back on funding, at least the director is still employed by the school and doesn't have to worry about who is going to sign his or her paycheck. Corps directors, if being paid, know that their salary is partially or fully dependent on how well they can stimulate the raising of funds, as well as the efficiency of collecting members' fees.

Either job is remarkably time consuming and can as a result burn out the director so that all they would love to do is abscond to a South Pacific island and worry only about where they will find their next coconut .

[The Other Mike]

Also, while band directors still have to raise funds via parents and booster organizations, they get a lot of their funding from the community via taxes and school district allotments.

Either job is remarkably time consuming and can as a result burn out the director so that all they would love to do is abscond to a South Pacific island and worry only about where they will find their next coconut .

I thought "funding" WAS the name of the isle in the South Pacific.

I can't see "funding" from here.

[DCIHasBeen]

about $!5-50K a year.

[Jeff Ream]

well band directors consider it a full time job, not all corps directors do. some band directors have to go it alone and be boss and the staff, corps directors dont

[oldbandguy]

Mike did a nice job of pointing out some differences.

One key difference is the corps director, unlike many band directors, does not have to deal with principals, superintendents, and school board members who may not have a clue of the educational value of the music program (band) to the school district and community.

Fortunately for the majority of my career (now retired) I had wise administrators that did understand this, but I've seen and experienced enough of the bad ones (to put it politely) to know how difficult they can make things.

I feel another key difference is the band director has much more "hands on" responsibility for the performance level of their groups. They are often involved in all stages of the musical development and growth of their students. The corps director is often the beneficiary of the band director's efforts in this regard.

I agree totally that both are very demanding jobs that can often lead to "burnout".

I believe the fund raising demands of the corps director is a much more difficult task than most band directors ever deal with. (I was blessed with an outstanding booster group most of my career.)

One similarity between the two is they have the opportunity to be an important part of a young person's life. That is a reward that many occupations never get to experience.

Edited October 30, 2010 by oldbandguy

[BigDale]

free to

$100+

[77TENOR]

I would have to agree with Mr. Boo on the funding side of things. Getting a corps down the road is brutally expensive these days. Not to mention most bands don't have regionals in Minneapolis, San Antonio, Atlanta, and Allentown before heading to their championships in Indy.

[Hornhoser]

Often, band directors are musicians who believe themselves to be administrators, while drum corps directors are administrators who believe themselves to be musicians.

[FHdork]

Pretty funny, hornhoser!

imo, the difference between the two is enormous. The only financial worry band directors have is whether the levy passes or fails. And don't get me wrong - that is huge right now. But the worry a drum corps director has is bigger...though s/he does have more power to effect the outcome. As we all know, drum corps are self funded. Few is any get grants (though they may find a way to change that...) - and the sources of funding they DO have are tenuous, erratic, and shifting quicker than sands in the Sahara (except for tour fees...which are in jeopardy only when a corps sees a significant drop in their competitive standing...).

Band directors have a great deal more stability (in general) and probably sleep better at night than your typical corps director.

Edited November 7, 2010 by FHdork