Jump to content

Judging Amplification and Electronics


Recommended Posts

THIS: (An adult in control of the sound during a judged performance when the performance/outcome is only supposed to be controlled by the performing youth) has been and will continue to be my main contention with the use of electronics in DCI.

Well, if the adult has control, then yes it should hurt the corps.

but here's the thing, and I get why the rules have been tweaked...

from inside the pit, or even at field level, you can't really tell what is and isn't balanced. you can only do that from up top. Now what kid is going to pay 3 grand to sit in the stands all summer and press buttons?

Now, I still have issues with balance now that it can be controlled from anywhere, and by all means yes the corps should be docked if the low end synth patch causes everyones ### to vibrate and overpower the corps. But, at a rock concert, are the sound guys on stage?

no, they're out and away from the stage. So I get why the rule was changed. I just think the judging community has, and is ducking balance issues

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those who say the board should be controlled by one of the performers, when's the last time you saw Geddy Lee walk out and tweak the console during a Rush concert?

a) Rush is not a youth organization which is being formally judged based on sound and visual production required by competition rule that *all sound and visual aspects in a live competition must be controlled by the performing youth members*; and b) Rush has a person dedicated to the sound board so that Geddy does not have to do what you described.

There is a simple fix in DCI: 149 twenty-one years of age or under youth performers on the field and 1 twenty-one years of age or under youth dedicated to running the sound board from wherever in the stadium. That way the balance and blend (which is controlled live and does effect the sound production) is controlled by a *youth member*. And do not give me that, "It is too complicated, or that the youth have to perform on the field, stuff". There are plenty of undergrad music production students who would jump at gaining the experience of controling a sound board for live concerts on tour all around the nation.

Edited by Stu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

a) Rush is not a youth organization which is being formally judged based on sound and visual production required by competition rule that *all sound and visual aspects in a live competition must be controlled by the performing youth members*; and b) Rush has a person dedicated to the sound board so that Geddy does not have to do what you described.

There is a simple fix in DCI: 149 twenty-one years of age or under youth performers on the field and 1 twenty-one years of age or under youth dedicated to running the sound board from wherever in the stadium. That way the balance and blend (which is controlled live and does effect the sound production) is controlled by a *youth member*. And do not give me that, "It is too complicated, or that the youth have to perform on the field, stuff". There are plenty of undergrad music production students who would jump at gaining the experience of controling a sound board for live concerts on tour all around the nation.

"yeah man, i paid $3k to play with an ipad all summer"

:ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"yeah man, i paid $3k to play with an ipad all summer"

:ph34r:

Running a sound board is just nothing more than playing with an ipad? Try telling that to professional sound engineers!!! Also, who said that the youth member running the board has to pay $3k? Not me. Are there various levels of dues already in place within many corps? Yes. Are membership dues "required" by DCI? Nope. So, there are ways to allow a youth 21 or under to be a part of the organization as a "member", accomplishing the duties of a sound engineer, by having them pay lower-dues; and again I am sure that there are many music production students out there who would jump at the chance to run a complex sound board system live on tour.

Edited by Stu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if it was a marching age member, off-field tinkering with what the performers are doing rubs me the wrong way.

I was a bass tech. Wouldn't it be great if I could turn a dial and compensate if bass 3 is overplaying in a pp musical passage during the show? It would improve the quality of the sound and the experience of the audience, but to me it would be completely dishonest. What the peformers do on the field is what the audience and judges see and hear - warts and all.

If an instrument can't be used without this kind of extra assistance, it doesn't belong.

Edited by Grandpa
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if it was a marching age member, off-field tinkering with what the performers are doing rubs me the wrong way.

I was a bass tech. Wouldn't it be great if I could turn a dial and compensate if bass 3 is overplaying in a pp musical passage during the show? It would improve the quality of the sound and the experience of the audience, but to me it would be completely dishonest. What the peformers do on the field is what the audience and judges see and hear - warts and all.

If an instrument can't be used without this kind of extra assistance, it doesn't belong.

During rehearsals, as a bass tech, you "did" adjust and compensate the playing heights for dynamics, timings, phrasings, marching intervals, etc.. of the bass drummers; sometimes from the field, sometimes from the stands, sometimes from the box. You just did not make those adjustment commands during a judged performance. So here is a compromise for your objection of the sound board during a show which would also curtail my objection of an adult affecting a live performance: The person running the sound board can make as many adjustments as they want during rehearsals and a do sound check during the pre-show portion (this is what techs for all performers already do anyway); however once the judging begins all manipulation of the sound system by an independent sound person ceases. Whatever happens during the judged portion happens (unless it is an actual dangerous situation to the performers). But my guess is that you would not want to find a compromise on this because you completely object to electronics.

Edited by Stu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

During rehearsals, as a bass tech, you "did" adjust and compensate the playing heights for dynamics, timings, phrasings, marching intervals, etc.. of the bass drummers; sometimes from the field, sometimes from the stands, sometimes from the box. You just did not make those adjustment commands during a judged performance. So here is a compromise for your objection of the sound board during a show which would also curtail my objection of an adult affecting a live performance: The person running the sound board can make as many adjustments as they want during rehearsals and a do sound check during the pre-show portion (this is what techs for all performers already do anyway); however once the judging begins all manipulation of the sound system by an independent sound person ceases. Whatever happens during the judged portion happens (unless it is an actual dangerous situation to the performers). But my guess is that you would not want to find a compromise on this because you completely object to electronics.

So which is more educational for the members? Learning how to compensate by changing how you play a certain passage or having someone else turn a knob to do it for you? Main reason why I don't like the idea of using amps this way. Takes away form the educational and competative areas (we got a better score cuz we controlled the amped sound better).

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

During rehearsals, as a bass tech, you "did" adjust and compensate the playing heights for dynamics, timings, phrasings, marching intervals, etc.. of the bass drummers; sometimes from the field, sometimes from the stands, sometimes from the box. You just did not make those adjustment commands during a judged performance. So here is a compromise for your objection of the sound board during a show which would also curtail my objection of an adult affecting a live performance: The person running the sound board can make as many adjustments as they want during rehearsals and a do sound check during the pre-show portion (this is what techs for all performers already do anyway); however once the judging begins all manipulation of the sound system by an independent sound person ceases. Whatever happens during the judged portion happens (unless it is an actual dangerous situation to the performers). But my guess is that you would not want to find a compromise on this because you completely object to electronics.

You're right - I do object to electronics - the sound board being just one reason.

But - if we're stuck with them I would be in favour of what you propose.

Edited by Grandpa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So which is more educational for the members? Learning how to compensate by changing how you play a certain passage or having someone else turn a knob to do it for you? Main reason why I don't like the idea of using amps this way. Takes away form the educational and competative areas (we got a better score cuz we controlled the amped sound better).

The members don't just play at one volume level and the sound guy uses a knob to adjust the volume. They are playing with all the nuance you would expect any performer to use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...