audiodb Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 it is funny that BOA has become the innovator - introducing these "first" You know what? If we're going to put lighting on the table, in addition to all the other expensive toys already in play, then I say let the tax-subsidized scholastic activities be the "innovator$". The drum corps activity blossomed because it made field pageantry and competition cost-effective. The farther we stray from this principle, the fewer drum corps we have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Powell Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 But who is using electronics as a crutch? Maybe Cavaliers just this year and....no one else? I was just stating if an arranger cant design without it - it is a crutch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjeffeory Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 Last year WGI brought the lighting rule which some groups succeeded and some did it just because they could. The problem i see is with a bright area it has less effect. This is the show in the dark and its ####### awesome. Inside you could barely tell from the top It was interesting, but I'd hate to see every DCI finalist attempt this kind of show, which is a rule was passed we could expect. Just like synths.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 While looking at the videos in the Goosebumps thread, something dawned on me. And, while I'm sure many have realized and stated as much before me, it think it bears repeating in this thread. Want to know why the Lot is so exciting to so many fans? There's no electricity in the Lot. Maybe designers should keep that in mind. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Powell Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 (edited) You know what? If we're going to put lighting on the table, in addition to all the other expensive toys already in play, then I say let the tax-subsidized scholastic activities be the "innovator$". The drum corps activity blossomed because it made field pageantry and competition cost-effective. The farther we stray from this principle, the fewer drum corps we have. I actually agree with this but the following BOA and changing rules to suit is kind of what got DCI in this quandry. Edited August 19, 2012 by Kevin Powell 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Powell Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 While looking at the videos in the Goosebumps thread, something dawned on me. And, while I'm sure many have realized and stated as much before me, it think it bears repeating in this thread. Want to know why the Lot is so exciting to so many fans? There's no electricity in the Lot. Maybe designers should keep that in mind. amen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjeffeory Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 I said it. Basically do not let one effect dictate budgets and overall design - that is a crutch. Management needs to manage. That is THE effect to design around, otherwise it's something different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 There's no electricity in the Lot. Beg to differ!!!!! There is plenty of electricity in "the lot". It is just produced by performers on acoustic instruments!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjeffeory Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 I never said I was for all this - I just said Why not? The corps should have the option to explore if they can afford to. The Why not is that the action of permitting something in DCI makes it implicitly compulsory the next year. Look at every rule change. They allowed it, and soon EVERY corps felt it was mandatory to do. No thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 The Why not is that the action of permitting something in DCI makes it implicitly compulsory the next year. Look at every rule change. They allowed it, and soon EVERY corps felt it was mandatory to do. No thanks! A rule change which effects "how" something is judged does not create much of a financial impact; a rule change which effects "what" is judged certainly does have a powerful financial impact. The problem with many of the DCI rule changes over the years have been they effect the "what" (as in G to Bb, Electronics, Amplification, numbers on the field, etc...). 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.