On the Drastic Change in Arranging Style

[MarimbasaurusRex]

A chart that is true to the original in terms of pacing, harmonic construction, tempo, etc. is not an arrangement. It is a simple transcription.

An arrangement is a new composition, utilizing some elements of pre-existing material.

Examples:

Ravel's "Pictures at an Exhibiton" is an orchestral transcription of Mussorgsky's piano composition.

Britten's "Young Persons Guide" is an arrangement of a Purcell work.

Kenton's "Malagueña" is a Bill Holman arrangement of the 6th movement of Lecuona's "Suite Andalucía" for piano.

Almost every drumcorps version of "Malagueña" is a tweaked transcription of the Holman chart.

Ummm... Not quite...

_________

From the New College Encyclopedia of Music -

Arrangement - (1) The adaptation of a piece of music so as to make it suitable for performance by forces other than those for which it was originally composed. (2) A harmonized setting of an existing melody.

Transcription - v. ARRANGEMENT

_________

What is commonly called arrangement in drum corps these days is perhaps more akin to variation on a theme.

Also from the NCEM -

Variation - The process of modifying a theme, figure or passage in such a way that it is recognizably derived from the original. (I'll spare everyone a listing of the 9 standard forms of variation, but most of them fall into the current practice of drum corps "arranging" in one way or another.)

[Geneva]

Not sure if I can link to this clip, but it's rehearsal footage of the Madison Scouts Alumni Reunion Project playing "The Way We Were." Give it a listen.

Pretty much a "who's who" of idiomatic drum corps brass arrangement elements. Elements that exploit and are endemic to the unique instrumentation of a drum and bugle corps. Yet I can think of virtually no corps that used any of them in their brass book this past season, save a few corps with arrangers experienced in the idiom at the helm.

The drastic change in arranging style is astounding, and mostly what's responsible for a decreased personal emotional connection (this I'm sure of) and audience emotional connection (just a conjecture, don't want to speak for others, IMO, IMHO, what have you). What's caused it? Instrumentation seems to be a big one...you can't do what they did with a G midvoice section on F mellophones, for instance. But there has to be more to it. Influence of wind ensemble? Less experienced arrangers with the tried and true ones moving on? Shifting current member interest? Surely it's not due a decrease in hornline talent.

As another observation, this arrangement takes on a level of musical maturity dwarfing that of a lot of what was on the DCI top 12 field this past year. Played on so-called "inferior instruments" with players 20 years on average older. Why is that?

Let's find the arranger of this piece as it was played, because that person should be arranging for the junior corps activity.

Bonus: Can you identify the idiomatic arrangement components from the chart?

Another great example of a "lost sound" from the drum corps past is 1975 Kilties. Listen to them on the Fan Network, especially the tune going into concert (does anybody know the name?). The ensemble is far from perfect, but what a great sound and style!

This is a great example of how the old drum corps sound, warts and all, was so very compelling. Ensemble is unquestionably better in modern corps, but not necessarily as exciting. There certainly was something in the old manner of presentation that was hard to put your finger on, but almost magical. BTW, I was in the stands at this show.

[drumno5]

...

By the standards I (and others here) use in judging arrangements, most contemporary arrangements we hear on the field are lacking in many ways. Thus, we judge them inferior because they are inferior by our standards.

But what are those standards? Is it just that you consider what you like to be "better" (whatever that means)? I think that's why dcipincollector is taking issue with you: your post is assuming that we should take at face value that newer arrangements are inferior based solely on your preference for older material.

peace,

Fred O.

[drumno5]

"How true something is to the original" is not a subjective claim. It is an objective, mathematical claim. It's defined by the so-called "edit distance" between notes and sections in the arrangement compared to those in the original.

Getting pretty deep here; I'm not sure I'm buying into all (or any, for that matter) of this. If someone prefers old school to contemporary or vice versa, that's fine, by all means. But trotting out formulas, "edit distance" algorithms and other pseudo-scientific mumbo jumbo in the hope of "proving" some kind of point is a bit too far out for me.

peace to all,

Fred O.

Edited November 20, 2010 by drumno5

[N.E. Brigand]

Getting pretty deep here; I'm not sure I'm buying into all (or any, for that matter) of this. If someone prefers old school to contemporary or vice versa, that's fine, by all means. But trotting out formulas, "edit distance" algorithms and other pseudo-scientific mumbo jumbo in the hope of "proving" some kind of point is a bit too far out for me.

That's not (necessarily) what Fame-Spear15 is claiming here: the formula he proposes merely establishes a way to determine how much one thing is like or dislike another, with no claim as to the merits of one versus the other. Once the "distance" between original and adaptation is thus determined, people's subjective opinions about the relative merits of various adaptations could be gauged through a poll -- and by comparing those to the results of the mathematical analysis, we might then learn how much faithfulness to the original matters to audience opinion. In theory, it's kind of a neat idea.

That said, and as others have noted, there are probably too many factors to consider to make such a formula practical.

[corpsband]

That's not (necessarily) what Fame-Spear15 is claiming here: the formula he proposes merely establishes a way to determine how much one thing is like or dislike another, with no claim as to the merits of one versus the other. Once the "distance" between original and adaptation is thus determined, people's subjective opinions about the relative merits of various adaptations could be gauged through a poll -- and by comparing those to the results of the mathematical analysis, we might then learn how much faithfulness to the original matters to audience opinion. In theory, it's kind of a neat idea.

That said, and as others have noted, there are probably too many factors to consider to make such a formula practical.

Comparing digital scores would be possible but there are still pretty large hills to climb even there. But I'm not sure where that would get you as the original scores will not capture what the original sounds like nor the DC arrangement. A more interesting possibility are some of the audio capture and separation software out there today. They can identify and separate parts in a live performance and allow you to edit them. A live performance broken into it's components might be interesting source material. Up for some FFTs Hroth? It would be interesting to have a go at it.

[drumno5]

...

That said, and as others have noted, there are probably too many factors to consider to make such a formula practical.

Which is kind of my take on the algorithm/formula approach: it's kind of futile to try and measure any of this empirically. And even if you could, someone (anyone!) is still completely within their rights to say that they like corps A from 19xx better than corps B from 20xx. What's the point, other than as an academic exercise?

What's more, I'm not certain that "faithfulness to the original" is the real sticking point here. The thread has drifted far form Hroth's original posit that the lack of "idiomatic drum corps brass arrangement elements" in current writing is "mostly what's responsible for a decreased personal...and audience emotional connection..." If a chart is full of corps-style "idiomatic elements" (some might call them drum corps cliches), how faithful could it be to its source material?

Thanks for the dialogue,

Fred O.

[Hrothgar15]

Right, my claim is I don't necessarily value faithfulness to an original piece at all, as long as it's still presented cohesively within the realm of drum corps. That's why I find the relentless backlash over my proposed algorithm so entertaining.

[Hrothgar15]

Up for some FFTs Hroth? It would be interesting to have a go at it.

Let me focus on one thesis at a time.

[drumno5]

Right, my claim is I don't necessarily value faithfulness to an original piece at all, as long as it's still presented cohesively within the realm of drum corps. That's why I find the relentless backlash over my proposed algorithm so entertaining.

As the saying goes, you pays your money and you takes your chances. Put something out here on the DCP and you never know who might pick it up, and where they might run with it!

all in good fun,

Fred O.