Jeff Ream Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Waiting for the "respect the kids" crowd to respond to this post. they wont because they are also the "we want only the very best" crowd 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruckner8 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 I have no bias towards a particular era. Just to particular types of sounds/ensembles I hear. That third sentence is probably it. But if I like it better, it shouldn't matter that you can describe it with those words. This is contradictory to your entire body of work on DCP. Namely, your point has always been that these things CAN BE DESCRIBED. And in so doing, can be replicated, in fact SHOULD BE replicated. So, I expect you to describe exactly why you prefer the former over the latter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hrothgar15 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 This is contradictory to your entire body of work on DCP. Namely, your point has always been that these things CAN BE DESCRIBED. And in so doing, can be replicated, in fact SHOULD BE replicated. So, I expect you to describe exactly why you prefer the former over the latter. Of course they can be described, and replicated. There's a certain style and instrumentation and sound that elicits that emotion from me. The fact that it just so happens to be called "crass" and "unbalanced" is only as relevant to the net enjoyment I get from hearing that sound. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drumno5 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Of course they can be described, and replicated. There's a certain style and instrumentation and sound that elicits that emotion from me. The fact that it just so happens to be called "crass" and "unbalanced" is only as relevant to the net enjoyment I get from hearing that sound. All facetiousness aside, I'm afraid I don't understand you. The best english teacher I ever had advised me never to use an incomplete comparison. "The fact that [the old-school sound] just so happens to be called "crass" and "unbalanced" is onlyas relevant to the net enjoyment I get from hearing that sound" as what? Being poked in the eye with a stick? Living in a cardboard box? ??? Fred O. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarimbasaurusRex Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 (edited) I'm just using my ears, and asking "is this worth paying for?" In 1973 many thousands of people said yes, that IS worth paying for, night after night. Tastes change, goals change, techniques change, instruments change. Different does not necessarily mean better or worse. If those 13 and under corps (Commodors 72, for instance) didn't exist back then, would we have today's BD? Probably not. If you don't want to pay to see them, that just means you don't want to support them. If you don't support the lower placing corps, how will they ever become higher placing corps? And sorry for the insult, but I felt one good insult deserved another. And I must say I'm continually amazed at the snobbery which seems to go hand in hand with drum corps participation. Edited February 3, 2011 by MarimbasaurusRex 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hrothgar15 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 All facetiousness aside, I'm afraid I don't understand you. The best english teacher I ever had advised me never to use an incomplete comparison. "The fact that [the old-school sound] just so happens to be called "crass" and "unbalanced" is onlyas relevant to the net enjoyment I get from hearing that sound" as what? Being poked in the eye with a stick? Living in a cardboard box? ??? Fred O. Good catch! Meant to say "relevant as" and not "as relevant." As in, only relevant to the extent of my enjoyment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Today's 12th (Heck maybe 23rd) place corps could probably have won in 1972. Ignoring that today's WC corps would have been disqualified in 1972 (on several counts)....I would contend that by the judging standards and expectations of 1972, a 2010 WC performance would be so far out of the hunt in GE alone that they would have no chance of winning. (And of course, the converse is true if a 1972 corps time-traveled into the 2010 championship.) DCI's birth, with its focus on choosing one clear, universal winner is a strong cause for the 380 corps disappearing, and I thank them for that. It's like watching a pee-wee tee-ball game from a bubble, where the parents/coaches/kids are all totally invested, but in your bubble you're thinking "who can watch this garbage, but parents/coaches/kids?" It doesn't really diminish what they're doing, for themselves, but don't expect everyone else to pay for it!!! How ironic, though....those 1972 corps you scoff at had the bigger paid audience. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie1223 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 (edited) How ironic, though....those 1972 corps you scoff at had the bigger paid audience. honestly, which live events didn't have a larger audience back then? With technology nowadays, there's a higher incentive to stay at home anyway. Edited February 3, 2011 by charlie1223 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiBoyinLA Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 (1) Costs, both in terms of money and time, have gone WAY up. It is vastly more expensive to field a corps these days, which means fewer small organizations can afford to sponsor a corps, and leads to an increasing financial burden falling upon members. The time demand also is much higher than in the past. With today's touring schedule, economic challenges, and far more families with two working parents, it is extremely difficult to find volunteers. The time demand on participants also is much higher. Drum corps did not used to be a 24/7 activity from Memorial Day until mid-August; kids used to be able to work part-time for significant stretches of the summer. (2) Public high school band programs have adopted many of the roles that "local" corps used to provide. Quality instruction at little to no direct cost to participants. Also, longer school years (including band camps) have cut into the available time for a drum corps season. IMHO, these are the two biggest factors in the demise of local corps and regional circuits, which were the vast majority of the "400 corps" of the 1970's that people often cite. There never were, and never will be, more than a few dozen corps each summer that toured outside of their regions for more than a week or two each summer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mello Dude Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 But this contributes nothing to, in fact has nothing to do with, the discussion. You're just coming on board to take a swipe at last year's winner because you didn't like their show, and giving yourself a smug, thumbs-up pat on the back like you've revealed some universal truth or something. Sorry, on this one. Fred O. You're right. How dare I!? Think about the kids! I mean, SHOULD I relegate myself to the grammar and punctuation police? I suppose if I did THAT, I would have to have proper syntax, spelling and punctuation before I case the first stone. 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.