Almost 40 years of changes at DCI, what do you think are the best 3

[Jeff Ream]

I checked out the first video I could find of that performance, and I have to say, I don't hear what people are complaining about. There are two very specific moments in the show where the front ensemble and battery take over, and its so obvious that that was the design teams' intent. At the very beginning of the show, the brass trails off from their idea, and the percussion introduce an entirely new idea and impact with it. A similar moment happens toward the end, where the pit is developing an idea, and out of nowhere, the brass takes over. Again, the intent was obvious. Other than those moments, I never felt like I lost the brass, or even any particular idea in the brass. When there was impact, I could hear a real contribution from every section, including the keyboard instruments. In piano sections I felt like the FE did a good job of tapering their phrases so that the brass lines were not overpowered. Was it perfect? Probably not. But what live performance is. Maybe you have a link to a different video. I'll keep looking for other ones.

I understand that some people don't like these direction design is headed, and want to hear every note the brass ever plays. But none of these kinds of design ideas would even be possible if it weren't for the amplification. That show is a great example of how amplification gives designers much more freedom, from the individual section writing point of view (using more than just metallics in impact moment in the pit), or from a big picture perspective (front ensemble changing the character of the show by impacting with a new idea as the brass decrescendos).

Again, not everyone is getting it right, but I'm having trouble seeing what the huge issue is. I certainly don't see it as a bigger issue than not being able to hear the front ensemble at all when the brass plays above forte.

then I guess it was far worse live. Hands down the most abusive of any corps I have seen yet, and I saw them 4 times that summer...the other 3 weren't even close.

[charlie1223]

My honest answer, I believe that the designers are bored. They are tired of doing what THEY perceive as the same thing again and again. They want to experiment. They feel that this is THEIR high art. I also believe that percussion arrangers are used to arranging a certain way for WGI or MB, and they want to do that in DCI, where the rules were distinguished. I'm not sure I buy the fuller sound argument. The problem, is that changes the sound of the ensemble, making it pretty generic. Of course that is my opinion. Who really knows other than the designers?

Fair statement. I think I agree. They are bored.

[audiodb]

Why not use hearing aids ?

( rimshot )

I realize you were kidding....but compared to the steps DCI has taken, this idea might have been worth looking into.

[JimF-LowBari]

Yes, I can see why money would be HUGE factor, if not the only factor in this synthesizer case. However, I wonder if money continues to be a factor that people will find it (eventually) MORE acceptable to have a string part played with a synthesizer instead of an actual string section. I mean, I think most people here would agree they would RATHER hear a live string section than a synthetic one. But if money continues to push towards synth maybe synths will soon be the "preferred" method? What do you think?

LOL, my main thought is #### glad I don't make a living off of music. Four times (2 operettas, 2 old Broadway shows) in a HS orchestra pit was enough. 35+ years later I can still remember crappy lines, bad vocals and the coach in Cinderella that broke an axle 5 seconds before it was supposed to be pulled on stage opening night.

Seriously, it will be interesting to see what happens in the future as paid "finer music" groups (orchestras, theater pits, etc) get more expensive and sponsorships get harder to find. We might get down to "Here's your choices folks, we use synths instead of other instruments to save $$$$. Or... we can't play at all!!".

Also will be interesting if new musicals will use a full pit or be written with less members/more synths in mind. The freakin' "Spiderman: Turn Back The Night" has turned into the money pit from Hell and investors might not want to back another overblown mu$ical for years to come. Think the OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health) inspectors have seen the show more than the paying customers.

[camel lips]

3 best :

1) introduction of Fan Network for live broadcasts, retrieval of earlier shows, etc

2) introduction of encores by Corps at shows

3) utilization of Alumni Corps in exhibition at Finals Week.

I really like your list and cannot think of anything to add other than the year they added front ensembles. I really like pits.

3 worst:

I am going to have to go with

1)Introduction of narration and singing

2) Electronics in any shape or form

3) Multi Key. Hate it..... wish it never happened. Bring back the G bugles.

[perc2100]

I get that there are a lot variables to contend with in setting up for a performance instance (with the walking bags of water the largest factor). But I also believe that corps should have things figured out well-enough by now to keep those variables from making a large impact on the audience experience. Things might not be perfect but they should be "close enough" to be acceptable quality.

And here is the point/problem:

In YOUR opinion, you don't like the way balance currently has been. I would say that generally, all of the corps more or less are balancing their ensembles the same, so arguably all of the corps are fine with current balance. Also, since all of the corps are doing the same thing, the judges apparently don't seem to have a problem either.

So really, instead of "unacceptable quality," perhaps what you really mean to say is that you personally do not like the way things are, and you wish corps staff/designers had your sensibilities. Insinuating that this is "poor quality" is likely false, vs stating your opinion on balance is probably more correct verbiage.

Just want to throw that out there: like or dislike the trends, but labeling "unacceptable quality" when every corps is doing it and judges are approving is kind of false logic.

But, this is the internet: where personal opinion typically is the same as fact to many ...

[perc2100]

I checked out the first video I could find of that performance, and I have to say, I don't hear what people are complaining about.

On a similar note, I spent a little bit of time this weekend watching some of my old DCI videos from the early/mid-90's. Oddly enough, I probably heard the pit MAYBE 60/75% of the time (being generous: obviously not counting 95 where a p triangle whole note overpowered all due to recording mic placement ). As has been discussed before, when the pit had a featured phrase (either a melodic ostinato, run, etc) the brass played long tones at very low volumes. The majority of the time (not the slow tune, not the percussion feature, not a pit solo phrase) you have a HARD time really reading what the mallet parts are. There are plenty of shows where I KNOW the music, have the music in my 'library,' and I still struggled to properly read it over the ensemble.

Obviously music design in those days was what it was: brass played the melody 90% of the time, there was usually some type of drum solo, and occasionally there was A phrase where a pit was playing a featured melody. Other times either the keys were VERY low in the mix (because of acoustic physics).

This is in stark contrast to now, where the mallet writing is just as prominent as the brass and drum line writing. Orchestration is now far more dense than it used to be in general. Instead of charts being mostly brass melody/harmonic support, 8 count drum solo into a push, 4 bar mallet ostinato transitioning into the next, softer phrase we now have full brass phrases with mallet counter melodies/melodic & harmonic supports happening predominantly. The mallets play more to accommodate rigorous visual demand on brass players + texture/color choices in orchestration.

I get that a lot of people may not be used to this "style" of arranging, are taken aback hearing the pit 'loud and clear' at all times, and revert back to their preference of music balance pre-amps. I also get that there are performances where groups screw up and set levels louder than they should.

But lets be real honest and clear, here: just come out and say "I don't personally like hearing the pit all of the time," and not the non-sensical "it's wrong and corps are screwing up" argument.

[corpsband]

And here is the point/problem:

In YOUR opinion, you don't like the way balance currently has been. I would say that generally, all of the corps more or less are balancing their ensembles the same, so arguably all of the corps are fine with current balance. Also, since all of the corps are doing the same thing, the judges apparently don't seem to have a problem either.

Not at all. In fact (except for the occasional t-goo) I was ok with the balance levels last season.

I'm merely suggesting that -- at this point in time -- "venue" should not be on the list of acceptable "reasons" for poor balance. Corps should have enough experience with a wide variety of venues that they should be able to "dial-in" close enough for the entire season.

Edited March 29, 2011 by corpsband

[audiodb]

On a similar note, I spent a little bit of time this weekend watching some of my old DCI videos from the early/mid-90's. Oddly enough, I probably heard the pit MAYBE 60/75% of the time (being generous: obviously not counting 95 where a p triangle whole note overpowered all due to recording mic placement ).

And as we all know, a VHS tape is the best possible reference regarding ensemble balance. (/sarcasm)

I get that a lot of people may not be used to this "style" of arranging, are taken aback hearing the pit 'loud and clear' at all times, and revert back to their preference of music balance pre-amps. I also get that there are performances where groups screw up and set levels louder than they should.

And I "get" that you have a need to dismiss anyone with a complaint about amp balance by mischaracterizing them as pit-haters. Like your very next sentence....

But lets be real honest and clear, here: just come out and say "I don't personally like hearing the pit all of the time," and not the non-sensical "it's wrong and corps are screwing up" argument.

[audiodb]

And here is the point/problem:

In YOUR opinion, you don't like the way balance currently has been. I would say that generally, all of the corps more or less are balancing their ensembles the same, so arguably all of the corps are fine with current balance.

Well, obviously, the corps will do whatever the judges determine to be proper.

Also, since all of the corps are doing the same thing, the judges apparently don't seem to have a problem either.

Ahh....so if the balance is OK in the press box, there's no problem?

So really, instead of "unacceptable quality," perhaps what you really mean to say is that you personally do not like the way things are, and you wish corps staff/designers had your sensibilities. Insinuating that this is "poor quality" is likely false, vs stating your opinion on balance is probably more correct verbiage.

Just want to throw that out there: like or dislike the trends, but labeling "unacceptable quality" when every corps is doing it and judges are approving is kind of false logic.

Assuming balance is OK everywhere is false logic.