TOC/G7 Related Discussion

[pearlsnaredrummer77]

You're probably right, DCI won't set up a separate division to be any-instrumentation, but my hunch is that the Seven will push to be able to do so in the TOC division because at least one of them has been pushing that direction for over a decade.

And 200+ members.

The fact is that a lot of corps are now run and taught by people that believe band with woodwinds to be more musical, artistic and just plain cool than drum corps. without woodwinds you are blocking creativity by disallowinf certain instruments and allowing others. Where did the synths, bass guitars, etc come from? Marching Band... So you've already opened the floodgates on band instruments with the integration of several new instrument families. Seems kind of hypocritical to allow the different instrument that YOU think is cool and adds "something" to the sound while limiting others because of an old fashioned prejudice against woodwinds, or Sousaphones or slide Trombones. It's very fuddy fuddy to say that drum corps should limit itself in anyway... :)

[MikeD]

True. We are certainly not in agreement where you'd like Drum Corps International to start up a separate division for Marching Bands so that they can use flutes, saxophones, slide trombones, or whatever and an " anything goes " instrumentation and what not there in DCI.

I don't see Drum Corps International settting up a separate division for Marching Bands with flutes, saxophones, trombones, etc either. These Marching Bands already have their own organization and doing what you like there already.

Actually, "these" MB do not, if some of the current DCI ensembles wish to add those elements to their organizations.

[MikeD]

Mike,

I don't have a problem with you stating your opinion... I'm just tired of the debate that happens every time you state it.

The horse has been dead and has been being beat for quite some time. Seriously. Give it a rest.

And yes... I'm not always the biggest fan of your opinions... not many of us are But we enjoy the conversation.

I am just personally tired of even glancing at a woodwind debate. And I might not be that active in this thread but I am reading it quite often. So when that popped up I wanted to gouge out my eyes.

I was responding to someone else. I am not the one who started the discussion.

[MikeD]

Again, thinking back to the days when we marched, was there dissonance between marching band and drum corps? Was drum corps trying to "court" marching band directors? I contend the answer is "No" they weren't, because most band directors didn't want their kids to become enamored with drum corps even while many (mine included) took busloads of kids to see shows.

The point is this question: Is it imperative that drum corps "court" HS band directors and/or be at all concerned about what band directors think of what drum corps is doing? If drum corps focuses on being a different step above HS band, and it's worthwhile in itself TO THE KIDS MARCHING, they will come because their kids will ask them to come.

Your analogy is similar to the Seven's belief that they must look, smell, and feel like band in order to attract kids and, therefor, drum corps must court the band directors in order to get kids to tryouts. I disagree with the premise entirely.

Actually, IMO drum corps was a victim of its own success in a way, going back to the 70's. More corps alumni became band directors, implemented corps-like shows...competitions...and became corps-friendly teachers. As the local corps world declined, that void was filled for a lot of kids by the corps-style competitive band...and the real 'marching band junkies' became the members of the DCI drum corps, or kids from bands that did not compete at all. Over time the decline in corps numbers resulted in the audition process, and it then led to the more experienced musicians, out of HS and into college by then, becoming the members of the modern corps.

Band directors have no power to dictate to kids what they can and can't do during their summer. If drum corps focuses on being different, and better/more challenging/"a step up" from HS band, it will attract the kids.

They are certainly free to guide their students in whatever direction they think best. And, if they have a band program where band camp overlaps the drum corps season, they do indeed have the power to dictate what their students can do in the summer.

Drum corps doesn't need to appeal to band directors, as the Seven contend. They need to appeal to kids.

Yes, it does have to appeal to band directors...just look at the busloads of MB kids who are brought to the various competitions around the country. For many kids in HS band, the band directors are among the most influential teachers/adults in their lives, outside of their parents. If they are actively anti-drum corps, their students will not even get a whiff of what it is all about.

[Slingerland]

Your analogy is similar to the Seven's belief that they must look, smell, and feel like band in order to attract kids and, therefor, drum corps must court the band directors in order to get kids to tryouts. I disagree with the premise entirely.

Band directors have no power to dictate to kids what they can and can't do during their summer. If drum corps focuses on being different, and better/more challenging/"a step up" from HS band, it will attract the kids.

Drum corps doesn't need to appeal to band directors, as the Seven contend. They need to appeal to kids.

Unfortunately, that statement is often not the case.

My kids are in a program that's not even a competitive band program, but failing to be at their marching band camp in early August is cause for dismissal from band, which is treated as a class subject in their school. not an extracurricular. None of them are marching drum corps this summer, but if they were, they would have to get a special dispensation in order to miss the band camp, and the director has already told me, in a conversation, that he would not be disposed to see drum corps as a good excuse for missing his camp. He doesn't even treat family vacations as a good excuse for missing camp. And that's with a program where the director and his staff have generally positive feelings about what drum corps can do.

If you took an approach that marketed drum corps as "this ain't no marching band" - and followed through by eliminating some of the dorkiest, twee-est things about drum corps now - you might successfully reposition drum corps as something that was more adult and more sellable to the non-band audience. But how do you say "we're not band" without inherently joining in on the stereotype that marching bands are dorky? If you're marketing your product as "we're not that", it's hard to do it without trying to emphasize how superior your product is over the alternative, and those who are responsible for creating the alternative are not likely to enjoy being used as the butt of your campaign.

So sure, I'd have no problem pushing drum corps that was harder edged and less dorky than band if that's what it takes to increase the overall audience. But you'd have to do so with your eyes open, that you've essentially put a block there for some of the biggest promoters the activity has now.

Alternatively, drum corps could seek to go another route and become much more professional and less traditional in our presentations - go places where the bands haven't yet gone. Start dumping the faux-military uniforms, give more scoring credit based on entertainment value rather than artistic and or technical detail, have judges who really have to be pleased, rather than being seen as "partners in education" the way it's done now. If you want to be "not band" but without specifically saying "we're not dorky", you'll have to put some product out there that sends the message loud enough that the message carries all on its own.

But that ain't gonna be cheap, and the same corps at the bottom of the financial pyramid who are crying now will be REALLY sobbing then.

Edited April 2, 2013 by Slingerland

[cixelsyd]

Actually, "these" MB do not, if some of the current DCI ensembles wish to add those elements to their organizations.

Consider the context of this thread, where people echo the G7 contention that all of open class and several WC corps should be removed from DCI because they would allegedly be better served by some other circuit. Never mind that this other circuit does not currently exist. Apparently, those corps are expected to create their own.

So even if there were DCI corps that wanted woodwinds, and even if there were no circuits to serve them (which has not yet been established), why is that a problem? They can create their own circuit.

[MikeD]

Consider the context of this thread, where people echo the G7 contention that all of open class and several WC corps should be removed from DCI because they would allegedly be better served by some other circuit. Never mind that this other circuit does not currently exist. Apparently, those corps are expected to create their own.

So even if there were DCI corps that wanted woodwinds, and even if there were no circuits to serve them (which has not yet been established), why is that a problem? They can create their own circuit.

Yes, they could, but why should they? IMO they are all better off inside one umbrella of DCI.

[pearlsnaredrummer77]

Unfortunately, that statement is often not the case.

My kids are in a program that's not even a competitive band program, but failing to be at their marching band camp in early August is cause for dismissal from band, which is treated as a class subject in their school. not an extracurricular. None of them are marching drum corps this summer, but if they were, they would have to get a special dispensation in order to miss the band camp, and the director has already told me, in a conversation, that he would not be disposed to see drum corps as a good excuse for missing his camp. He doesn't even treat family vacations as a good excuse for missing camp. And that's with a program where the director and his staff have generally positive feelings about what drum corps can do.

If you took an approach that marketed drum corps as "this ain't no marching band" -

Alternatively, drum corps could seek to go another route and become much more professional and less traditional in our presentations - go places where the bands haven't yet gone. Start dumping the faux-military uniforms, give more scoring credit based on entertainment value rather than artistic and or technical detail, have judges who really have to be pleased, rather than being seen as "partners in education" the way it's done now. If you want to be "not band" but without specifically saying "we're not dorky", you'll have to put some product out there that sends the message loud enough that the message carries all on its own.

If you took 50 random people off the street and showed them a G7 corps and a top historically black show band, 50 people out of 50 would prefer the band. DCI no longer has a universal appeal: it's for the hard core.

Once you let open Pandora's box by adding the syths, you might as well consummate the marriage and allow anything the band director desires. If you allow 300 members like WVU marching band that can increase gate, produce more alumni to ensure the stands are filled in the future.

DCI is in limbo and should take that final step. The corps want woodwinds, the staff want woodwinds, so no sense in being frustrated by anything stupid and reactionary like tradition. It's still drum corps if you allow sousaphones, clarinets and oboes! Drum Corps is not about instrumentation: the addition of synths, narrative drama, and guitar proved that.

Edited April 2, 2013 by pearlsnaredrummer77

[cixelsyd]

If you took an approach that marketed drum corps as "this ain't no marching band" - and followed through by eliminating some of the dorkiest, twee-est things about drum corps now - you might successfully reposition drum corps as something that was more adult and more sellable to the non-band audience. But how do you say "we're not band" without inherently joining in on the stereotype that marching bands are dorky? If you're marketing your product as "we're not that", it's hard to do it without trying to emphasize how superior your product is over the alternative, and those who are responsible for creating the alternative are not likely to enjoy being used as the butt of your campaign.

So sure, I'd have no problem pushing drum corps that was harder edged and less dorky than band if that's what it takes to increase the overall audience. But you'd have to do so with your eyes open, that you've essentially put a block there for some of the biggest promoters the activity has now.

Alternatively, drum corps could seek to go another route and become much more professional and less traditional in our presentations - go places where the bands haven't yet gone. Start dumping the faux-military uniforms, give more scoring credit based on entertainment value rather than artistic and or technical detail, have judges who really have to be pleased, rather than being seen as "partners in education" the way it's done now. If you want to be "not band" but without specifically saying "we're not dorky", you'll have to put some product out there that sends the message loud enough that the message carries all on its own.

But that ain't gonna be cheap, and the same corps at the bottom of the financial pyramid who are crying now will be REALLY sobbing then.

If you waste a word of your marketing message on the "we are not dorky" argument, you have already shot yourself in the proverbial foot. Both feet, in fact.

If drum corps sells best by being different from marching band, then let it be different. Just do it. No need to waste marketing money arguing about whether it has been done or not. Our current audience is well aware that drum corps is different from marching band. Always has been.

[cixelsyd]

Yes, they could, but why should they? IMO they are all better off inside one umbrella of DCI.

I agree with you that all the corps (OC and WC) would be better off under one umbrella now. But if there are groups who want to do something other than drum corps, DCI is probably not the place for them to do that.