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

[perc2100]

Exactly. Dynamics is the key. Working through balance issues using positioning, dynamics, and musical skill has yielded some of the most creative and effective musical moments in DCI history. I would add that the argument for hearing all instruments at all times is a musical fallacy (I realize your not making that argument, but are summarizing the arguments of others)

I don't disagree with this at all, but I do think it's easy to be myopic on this matter. The options should be one or the other, but the choice should be "how can we best utilize EVERYTHING at our disposal: staging, dynamics, orchestration, amplification." Eliminating any of those applications out-of-hand is a detriment, while maximizing the best of all of them yields a great ensemble (note, I'm not arguing ensembles pre-amplification were not great - there were some incredible groups, and FWIW I marched in the 90's before amps/electronics were legal - I'm merely saying there is no reason to arbitrarily cut off or disparage amplification 'just because').

Nevertheless, one of the worst mistakes that can be made in large ensemble arranging is for all instruments to be heard at all times,(aside from very few exceptions where it's for momentary effect). From classical orchestras to parade and military bands and virtually any other large ensemble including drum corps, the most musically satisfying arrangements are those where each section yields sonic territory to other instruments at different times throughout the piece. Otherwise it becomes overload. One of the main differences I hear between modern and classic drum corps isn't only about synths and narration, it's about a lack of perceived balance due to amplifiers, musical selection, and arrangement methods.

1) I agree, and I don't think that is going on at drum corps, at least not at the highest levels of the activity where arrangers are accomplished and experienced. I think it is wrong to place an automatic cause/effect that amplification leads to over-orchestration: it COULD, but that does not seem to be the case for the most part.

2) I think, conversely, arrangers/composers are able to utilize more colors/timbres of sonority because of amplification: a lush, lower-octave roll on a five octave marimba that would've easily gotten lost without amplification. Sound effects from the front ensemble that would've previously have been over-played to be heard at even a mf can now have a warmer/richer timbre of sound when played at softer volumes while amplified. Brass solos can be manipulated to add effects, can be staged anywhere on the field for visual needs, etc.

3) nearly all of the above musical genres you quote above

From classical orchestras to parade and military bands and virtually any other large ensemble including drum corps, the most musically satisfying arrangements are those where each section yields sonic territory to other instruments

utilize amplification! Watching the LA Phil at the Hollywood Bowl, military bands in larger outdoor venues at times, you can see & hear the ensembles are mic'ed to better "deliver" the musical product. They orchestration & arrangements, of course, are no different mic'ed vs acoustic: and the same is mostly true foe drum corps arranging I think.

While amplification gives arrangers more options, I think the largest difference is with approach & mallet selection by front ensemble members.

[MikeD]

IIRC, the snipping of the show length had to do with how many corps would the TV program fit when championships were televised and could we get more corps on TV. Of course, the thirteen minutes was a maximum number with most DCI world class corsp spending less time before the judge's analysis for better scores and less tick-ability even after subjective judging was acknowledged.

In my old memory...pre-DCI shows were between 11:30 and 13:00. At 11:30 the first gun went off to signify the end of execution judging. Only GE was judged after that.

My guess is that most corps were in the 12:00-12:30 range in total show length, depending on how much of a finale they decided to do.

[onfirepro]

1) I agree, and I don't think that is going on at drum corps, at least not at the highest levels of the activity where arrangers are accomplished and experienced. I think it is wrong to place an automatic cause/effect that amplification leads to over-orchestration: it COULD, but that does not seem to be the case for the most part.

I think it is. I think at both live shows and on the dvd's the pit is out of balance and is louder than it should be relative to the wind instruments. Even people I introduce drum corps for the first time complain that all those "bells and xylophones" as they call them are too noisy and distracting

2) I think, conversely, arrangers/composers are able to utilize more colors/timbres of sonority because of amplification: a lush, lower-octave roll on a five octave marimba that would've easily gotten lost without amplification. Sound effects from the front ensemble that would've previously have been over-played to be heard at even a mf can now have a warmer/richer timbre of sound when played at softer volumes while amplified. Brass solos can be manipulated to add effects, can be staged anywhere on the field for visual needs, etc.

To many drum corps fans, this manipulation of gadgets and amplification detracts more than it adds. What's most impressive, I think, is the natural acoustic volumes of the various instruments being performed and blended in such a way as to be pleasing on the whole. I think that better embodies the spirit and tradition of drum corps. When I know that the tuba sound I'm hearing is being backed and supported by a synth, it's less impressive. When that "wall of sound" is being manipulated by mics and synthesizers, then I don't know how much is the pure power of the corps, and how much is attributed to the technical wizardry that is behind them. take a year like 1991 or 1992. There was so much power, dynamics, and subtleties in those shows. Everything came through loud and clear, yet there wasn't one amplifier or speaker helping any section. The soloists, sounded great. The sections, including pit, came through loud and clear. Not only did it not sound worse, it sounded better, IMO, both live and on the recordings. (I was there live, and I have the recordings).

3) nearly all of the above musical genres you quote above utilize amplification! Watching the LA Phil at the Hollywood Bowl, military bands in larger outdoor venues at times, you can see & hear the ensembles are miked to better "deliver" the musical product. They orchestration & arrangements, of course, are no different miked vs acoustic: and the same is mostly true foe drum corps arranging I think.

In this case, I'm referring to the kind of amplification occurring in DCI, where primarily one section is miked and the others are not. In your examples, those venues are exceptions, not the rule, and the entire band or orchestra is being miked as a whole, not individual sections. You even admit that they use them "at times." Again, it's the exception based on a specific entertainment purpose. Amplifying a DCI pit section seems to me like an answer to a question the fans, even knowledgeable ones, never asked. Were audiences really complaining that they couldn't hear the pit? Those instruments are plenty loud, and the pit places them right out front! '91 star even had pit players stroking a glockenspiel with violin bows. No problem hearing those, and there was no amplification there. We can disagree, and you can argue for the modern approach to drum corps,and I can argue for a more traditional approach, and it's all subjective. I just find the balance of pre 2004 corps to have a better blend and more natural sound as they work to achieve that power and balance without the need for amplification. In fact, in a world where amplification for "wow" effect is becoming more common, I think it would be a worthy badge of honor for Drum Corps to shun such things as a matter of principle, and be able to proudly proclaim "what you hear is us, all us, and only us. no help required"

[N.E. Brigand]

In this case, I'm referring to the kind of amplification occurring in DCI, where primarily one section is miked and the others are not. In your examples, those venues are exceptions, not the rule, and the entire band or orchestra is being miked as a whole, not individual sections. You even admit that they use them "at times." Again, it's the exception based on a specific entertainment purpose. Amplifying a DCI pit section seems to me like an answer to a question the fans, even knowledgeable ones, never asked. Were audiences really complaining that they couldn't hear the pit? Those instruments are plenty loud, and the pit places them right out front! '91 star even had pit players stroking a glockenspiel with violin bows. No problem hearing those, and there was no amplification there. We can disagree, and you can argue for the modern approach to drum corps,and I can argue for a more traditional approach, and it's all subjective. I just find the balance of pre 2004 corps to have a better blend and more natural sound as they work to achieve that power and balance without the need for amplification. In fact, in a world where amplification for "wow" effect is becoming more common, I think it would be a worthy badge of honor for Drum Corps to shun such things as a matter of principle, and be able to proudly proclaim "what you hear is us, all us, and only us. no help required"

This more or less sums up my feelings, as well. A symphony orchestra in the concert hall or a string quartet in the recital hall would not normally be miked. Put them in a large outdoor venue, and they might need electronic assistance. Part of what made drum corps special to me, and to some others, was that they didn't need this help: they were able to create a big beautiful sound outdoors without the crutch of amplification. To cite the analogy in my signature: they cleared the high jump bar without using a trampoline. Sure, you can leap over a much higher bar with the trampoline, but for some of us, that's less impressive.

[Cadets98]

Lots of visual over music as negatives on here. I could not agree more! Please tilt it back towards music.

[onfirepro]

This more or less sums up my feelings, as well. A symphony orchestra in the concert hall or a string quartet in the recital hall would not normally be miked. Put them in a large outdoor venue, and they might need electronic assistance. Part of what made drum corps special to me, and to some others, was that they didn't need this help: they were able to create a big beautiful sound outdoors without the crutch of amplification. To cite the analogy in my signature: they cleared the high jump bar without using a trampoline. Sure, you can leap over a much higher bar with the trampoline, but for some of us, that's less impressive.

Exactly. That's a great quote, and some good thoughts. Thanks. And to sum up your other quote "For some the only glimpse. For some the... Umm well maybe that one doesn't work so well here. How about "How selfish soever man may be supposed, there are evidently some.... umm....ahhh maybe that doesn't work either. Well anyway, thanks!

Edited September 19, 2013 by onfirepro

[MikeD]

This more or less sums up my feelings, as well. A symphony orchestra in the concert hall or a string quartet in the recital hall would not normally be miked. Put them in a large outdoor venue, and they might need electronic assistance. Part of what made drum corps special to me, and to some others, was that they didn't need this help: they were able to create a big beautiful sound outdoors without the crutch of amplification. To cite the analogy in my signature: they cleared the high jump bar without using a trampoline. Sure, you can leap over a much higher bar with the trampoline, but for some of us, that's less impressive.

The thing is...they did need help pre-amps in the pit. Using overly hard mallets and playing with more force than would be natural was the 'help' back then to make them audible. I prefer today. I know a wonderful mallet player who played in the pit of a top level DCA corps this year...she said to me just last night that her wrists killed her all summer, having to play with such force.

[drilltech1]

IIRC, the snipping of the show length had to do with how many corps would the TV program fit when championships were televised and could we get more corps on TV. Of course, the thirteen minutes was a maximum number with most DCI world class corsp spending less time before the judge's analysis for better scores and less tick-ability even after subjective judging was acknowledged. [by drilltech 1]

......

In my old memory...pre-DCI shows were between 11:30 and 13:00. At 11:30 the first gun went off to signify the end of execution judging. Only GE was judged after that.

My guess is that most corps were in the 12:00-12:30 range in total show length, depending on how much of a finale they decided to do. [by Mike D]

......

Interestingly as an aside, Hopkins proposed at a recent Janual to return show lengths to the 13 minute mark and was unanimously voted down by the other corps who felt they already struggled for quality with the time limits currently in place. Check past threads. I heard from some who were there at that time that other directors referred to the 13 minutes as "DCA" lengths. I wasn't there, just sharing the gossip.

Edited September 19, 2013 by drilltech1

[cixelsyd]

The thing is...they did need help pre-amps in the pit. Using overly hard mallets and playing with more force than would be natural was the 'help' back then to make them audible. I prefer today. I know a wonderful mallet player who played in the pit of a top level DCA corps this year...she said to me just last night that her wrists killed her all summer, having to play with such force.

You know, there is another option. Like every other instrument in drum corps, if you need more sound from it, use more of them. When corps found that 2 or 3 mellophones were not enough, they added more. They did not just tell the 2 or 3 players to play so loud it hurts... and they did not lobby for electronic amplification of mellophones.

[MikeD]

You know, there is another option. Like every other instrument in drum corps, if you need more sound from it, use more of them. When corps found that 2 or 3 mellophones were not enough, they added more. They did not just tell the 2 or 3 players to play so loud it hurts... and they did not lobby for electronic amplification of mellophones.

I never you knew you were in favor of larger pits.

That might work as long as they all are playing the exact same part, which is not how it normally works in the front ensemble. So if you want two marimba parts, you then need to buy four of them and use four players to put two on a part, or six to put three on a part.Then if you want two vibe parts, you would need something similar. You might end up needing six marimbas and six vibes in that case, and use up 12 players to play the parts in a reasonably decent manner in that case, if the staff decided three on a part gave the best balance. That would work. If the design team decides to have three parts per instrument...then you'd need six or nine marimbas, six or nine vibes...etc....plus add in the rest of the front ensemble.

I prefer to amplify the current voices. Just my choice.