glory Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 And yet, despite the technology that permits us to record, reproduce, or compose/perform music electronically without the need for a real-time human performer, crowds still flock to witness the old-fashioned practice of performing music live....with all it's flaws. Sometimes, the time-honored method of doing something is the fundamental attraction. emphasis added I'm not sure "flock" is an accurate choice of words in an age when concert attendance is down and symphonies and ballets nationwide are struggling to sell tickets and survive. Even popular acts are tougher draws. The Wall Street Journal reported last week that concert ticket sales fell 12% last year. More telling to me is the fact that Broadway audiences accepted amplified voices with hardly a stir. Broadway could do it all accoustic - but few would care. HH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie1223 Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 Troopers made a train-entering-the-station sound with wire brushes and timpani with the help of amplification. That worked for me. Amped pit has been useful. Synths have been a design crutch. How are "synths" currently used a design crutch? How exactly are synths used in that way? So, what made drum corps unique for so long was the avoidance of electronic sounds via synths (and any other electronic instrument). What! That's not at ALL what made drum corps unique! The reason why drum corps didn't use electronics back then was because it was unavailable and unpractical! Drum Corps is STILL unique even if it does use electronics. We should stop denying that part of it. Remove the synths and you force design toward the creative thinking that drove drum corps GE to new heights for years and years. That's what I would love to see happen. How has that STOPPED because of synths? The bolded statement is just silly. Creative thinking has as much to do with boundless possibilities as it does with thinking within limits. Frankly I think with synths it allows designers to get even more creative! Though it might be a creativity that you just don't appreciate. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Brace Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 I did a poll on this a year or two ago... It ended up being about 40% don't like it, 50% tolerate it, and 10% like it...was so overwhelmingly against narration and synths that it wasn't funny. Of course, it was poopoo'd by the naysayers, saying it can't be accurate, as dcp isn't everyone that listens to drum corps, etc... and the naysayers would be correct. DCP is dominated by a few of us voices. Many lurk here and do not participate in polling which is admittedly unscientific. I would add this. DCP has had little if any affect on anything reversing the "super marching band" trend. Our voices first, cannot agree on what those changes would be and second, we have not been able to demonstrate consequence to those who govern DCI. That is what is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Brace Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 emphasis added I'm not sure "flock" is an accurate choice of words in an age when concert attendance is down and symphonies and ballets nationwide are struggling to sell tickets and survive. Even popular acts are tougher draws. The Wall Street Journal reported last week that concert ticket sales fell 12% last year. More telling to me is the fact that Broadway audiences accepted amplified voices with hardly a stir. Broadway could do it all accoustic - but few would care. HH yeah, there are no statistics which prove any flocking of anything. Nationwide concert attendance is way down as well. The performing arts generally are struggling no matter the genre. And, this would be partially recession related and partially technology related. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shamu89 Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 (edited) emphasis added I'm not sure "flock" is an accurate choice of words in an age when concert attendance is down and symphonies and ballets nationwide are struggling to sell tickets and survive. Even popular acts are tougher draws. The Wall Street Journal reported last week that concert ticket sales fell 12% last year. More telling to me is the fact that Broadway audiences accepted amplified voices with hardly a stir. Broadway could do it all accoustic - but few would care. HH Another article from digitalmusicnew.com (I know - not as reputable as WSJ, but it's what I could find). http://digitalmusicnews.com/stories/110210liveconcerts I think that a large part of declining attendance at DCI is just declining attendace at all activities like this. Too much competition with entertainment opportunities at home. As much as I love football, and know that the experience is completely different when at the stadium, it's not worth the money, hassle, time, and discomfort it takes to go to the game versus watching it at home. For those of us that love the drum corps experience, there's absolutely no substitute for seeing it live. Even Bluray and a top-shelf stereo system is no match. For people that just like it, they either wait for the DVD, watch it on youtube, or just lose interest all together because to them it's not worth the hassle and money. And even for me who has a daughter marching her second season this year, money is a BIG issue. While I won't get to see as many corps live as I'd like, I can't justify shelling out the money to travel to Indy, get a hotel, buy meals, and pay the ticket prices I did last year for three of us (it cost almost as much to do that as her tour fees) especially since she's going off to college next year. We're going to try and catch nearby shows and volunteer more, but there's no way we can do the 3-day finals experience again. I'm an fan of DCI since the mid-80's off and on, and since I have a MM in the family, I love DC, A&E included. Would I like less of it . . . sometimes, but at this point I'll take all the drum corps I can get. ;) Edited January 5, 2011 by Shamu89 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Brace Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 Another article from digitalmusicnew.com (I know - not as reputable as WSJ, but it's what I could find). http://digitalmusicnews.com/stories/110210liveconcerts I think that a large part of declining attendance at DCI is just declining attendace at all activities like this. Too much competition with entertainment opportunities at home. As much as I love football, and know that the experience is completely different when at the stadium, it's not worth the money, hassle, time, and discomfort it takes to go to the game versus watching it at home. For those of us that love the drum corps experience, there's absolutely no substitute for seeing it live. Even Bluray and a top-shelf stereo system is no match. For people that just like it, they either wait for the DVD, watch it on youtube, or just lose interest all together because to them it's not worth the hassle and money. And even for me who has a daughter marching her second season this year, money is a BIG issue. While I won't get to see as many corps live as I'd like, I can't justify shelling out the money to travel to Indy, get a hotel, buy meals, and pay the ticket prices I did last year for three of us (it cost almost as much to do that as her tour fees) especially since she's going off to college next year. We're going to try and catch nearby shows and volunteer more, but there's no way we can do the 3-day finals experience again. great post. Is technology making audience participation more and more irrelevant? Look at recent college football games...I swear they are loop tracking crowd noise in some instances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 emphasis added I'm not sure "flock" is an accurate choice of words in an age when concert attendance is down and symphonies and ballets nationwide are struggling to sell tickets and survive. Even popular acts are tougher draws. The Wall Street Journal reported last week that concert ticket sales fell 12% last year. Must have been those wireless mics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie1223 Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 yeah, there are no statistics which prove any flocking of anything. Nationwide concert attendance is way down as well. The performing arts generally are struggling no matter the genre. And, this would be partially recession related and partially technology related. This. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skewerz Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 (edited) How are "synths" currently used a design crutch? How exactly are synths used in that way? What! That's not at ALL what made drum corps unique! The reason why drum corps didn't use electronics back then was because it was unavailable and unpractical! Drum Corps is STILL unique even if it does use electronics. How has that STOPPED because of synths? The bolded statement is just silly. Creative thinking has as much to do with boundless possibilities as it does with thinking within limits. Frankly I think with synths it allows designers to get even more creative! Though it might be a creativity that you just don't appreciate. 1. they are used to double brass parts...they are used to make "sounds" that corps would otherwise have to use their imagination to create. 2. It was available. It was impractical. Drum corps was designed with acoustic instruments that didn't need amplification, so there was no need for it...and yes, that made drum corps unique. 3. The more constraints you have to produce, the more creative you have to be. Anyone can build a bridge with no material constraints, but you have to be creative to make a viable bridge with just popsicle sticks and bubble gum. Another thing is when you have 10 media to work with, instead of 50, it's easier to balance...easier to polish, and isn't as "busy". When you have boundless possibilities, it's MUCH easier to do something different, but easier doesn't = better. In the last decade we've added more "easy buttons" than Staples. For a niche performance based entertainment media, easy button = bad. as stolen from Jimmy Dugan..."It's supposed to be hard. If it wasn't hard, everyone would do it. The hard... is what makes it great." Edited January 5, 2011 by skewerz 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie1223 Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 (edited) 1. they are used to double brass parts...they are used to make "sounds" that corps would otherwise have to use their imagination to create. They are also used NOT to double brass parts, to create a lyrical lines that are not being played by the brass. I've heard great piano solos in drum corps shows. Also, they don't double ALL brass parts, mostly bottom and for large "hit" or chord sections. They do not double the brass parts for all Aspects of the show. The synth actually doubles pit parts more than they double lower brass parts. they are used to make "sounds" that corps would otherwise have to use their imagination to create. I honestly don't think that this example is really enough for people to get upset about then. I personally don't care if a corps uses an "apple crunch" as a sound effect or some contraption that makes a different sound that's supposed to resemble an "apple crunch" acoustically. To me it doesn't matter because I don't love drum corps for those kind of "sound effects" it produces. If acoustic "sound effects" are that important to you, then fine. For me they aren't. 2. It was available. It was impractical. Drum corps was designed with acoustic instruments that didn't need amplification, so there was no need for it...and yes, that made drum corps unique. Drum corps was initially created to keep troops in step as they traveled from one point to another and to keep the moral of troops up. All these things happened outdoors. And No, that did not make drum corps unique. Drum Corps is unique because it's marching music. There wasn't another organization like it. And when drum corps was first starting up there were hundreds of different performing art groups that were acoustic. The fact that drum corps was also acoustic did not make it unique. It was unique because it it had colorguard, drums and brass, perfroming a competitive show on a football field. THAT is what made drum corps unique. And drum corps is STILL unique for doing those things today. 3. The more constraints you have to produce, the more creative you have to be. Anyone can build a bridge with no material constraints, but you have to be creative to make a viable bridge with just popsicle sticks and bubble gum. I agree with this. Obviously, its very clear that under constraints creativity occurs, yes. But if you keep making a bridge out of gum and Popsicle sticks you'll never know what it would be like to create a bridge with spaghetti and meatballs. OR what you'd be able to do if you were able to build a bridge with Spaghetti, Meatballs, gum and Popsicle sticks. Plus, Corps still have a choice to NOT use samples for a desired effect, if they feel the effect would be better if it did not need a sample. IF designers don't feel obligated to keep their "sound effects" acoustic then that must not be a priority for them. It must be that to designers creating an acoustic "sound effects" is not as important as the effect the the "sound effect" alone produces. "It's not how we're creating the sound effect that matters, its that we're doing it." BUT, at the same time I hear corps also make acoustic sound effects, and designers know that they still have those options available. Having synths does not mean no more acoustic sound effects, it just means that designers now have option to create non-acoustic sound effects. In my opinion the sound effects used by corps have all varied in effect. I really liked how Crown last year used those rewinding effects in the end of the their show last year. I thought it was a pretty good use of electronics to create an effect. Another thing is when you have 10 media to work with, instead of 50, it's easier to balance...easier to polish, and isn't as "busy". When you have boundless possibilities, it's MUCH easier to do something different, but easier doesn't = better. I would say that this all depends on the circumstances. We can all think of examples were easier isn't better in drum corps and when easier is better in drum corps. The concept of things being "busy" has more to do with the design aspects of the show than it has to do with the tools available to the designers. It obviously possible to have "50 media" to work with and have things in balance, polished and not "busy". It's all in HOW things are used. In the last decade we've added more "easy buttons" than Staples. For a niche performance based entertainment media, easy button = bad. What would be an example of an "easy button"? I think that performances are getting more difficult than easier. A niche performance based entertainment (and educational) medium would benefit from making things easier in creating a certain effect. That effect however is subjective to the audience member. For me, I benefited from being able to hear the apple crunch clearly and know that it was an apple crunch. It was a poignant part of that show and all the ideas that came to mind from hearing the sound of someone biting into the forbidden fruit enhanced the show for me because the sound was able to evoke ideas within me that helped me enjoy that part of the show even more. We want show ideas to be easily understood to the audience (if the designers decide that their show should even have an idea). And sound effects allow us that comfort. Whether or not everyone appreciates that is completely different story. You obviously don't appreciate those comforts and that's fine. Everyone has their preferences. as stolen from Jimmy Dugan..."It's supposed to be hard. If it wasn't hard, everyone would do it. The hard... is what makes it great." Agreed, drum corps is sufficiently hard. Some corps do things harder than others but that's always going to happen. We don't have rules on tempos that must be reached, 16th note runs that must be achieved and volumes needed to be produced. Going the distances on those aspects make the performance harder so why don't we put requirements on those aspects? If we are so concerned that corps create acoustic sound effects so that it makes it "harder" then shouldn't we create rules on the difficulty of the music? Put a tempo quota on shows (must be over 208 bpm? And have a judge with decibel monitor? No, we don't need rules in drum corps to make things harder because drum corps is already sufficiently difficult on its own. The use of synths may make it easier to produce a sound effect but keeping it in does not make or break drum corps, it does not make drum corps less creative or easier. It just makes it different. Again, it has everything to do with the designers. Designers decide whats important for them in a show, and they decide how much to cater to a progressive audience or a traditional audience while still winning first place. Edited January 5, 2011 by charlie1223 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.