Pit Amplification Almost Worthless..You Decide

[cixelsyd]

Were those things mentioned in the actual proposal, or was that just discussion on DCP and RAMD?

As I understand it, those were arguments mentioned in the caucuses and boardrooms where the proposal was debated and ultimately ratified. (And yes, they were also mentioned on DCP and RAMD in discussions of similar context.)

[Jeff Ream]

Were those things mentioned in the actual proposal, or was that just discussion on DCP and RAMD?

proposals and interviews before and after on the DCI site.

[charlie1223]

So why are they using classical indoor instruments on a football field, if you can't hear them without playing in a way that gets you getting looked down on by symphonic percussion players?

There are plenty of mallet instruments that can be heard just fine beyond the pit. Xylophones, bells, glockenspiel, bass drum, chimes, timpani (Crown has used timpani all the way around the field for two years now...). I assume vibes can be heard fine as well. If marimbas are unsuited to outdoor use, then don't use them--the guys on the field are using appropriate instruments.

If you know anything about to arrange front ensemble music not having a marimbas or vibes would kill the arrangement possibilities and the middle range elements. The ensemble would sound thin and the kind if parts you can write would be significantly hindered. We have marimbas and vibes with amplification and that is the fix for having indoor equipment outdoors. It's just inconceivable to have a DCI drum corps without marimbas/vibes. You need to have marimbas and vibes in your drum corps to be competitive it's as much a part if it has having a snare line or mellophones. This is the new normal.

Edited August 14, 2013 by charlie1223

[charlie1223]

That rather misses skywhopper's point, since he already mentioned that most of the instruments in drum corps brass lines and batteries are different from those used in the concert hall. The point being that drum corps are different from concert ensembles in that rather significant way, so there's no inherent reason that where corps happen to be more like concert ensembles they need to use the same techniques.

They are different, yes. The inherent reason that "where corps happen to be more like ensembles they need to use the same technique" is because of the members that these corps actually attract. I don't know numbers but a LARGE number of Pit members study classical percussion at their university and are classical percussion majors. If they could get nothing out of their experience that can apply to the concert world they wouldn't do it especially if it hindered their ability to do well in concert percussion. And their professors would discourage it (Many still do). There are a lot of differences between playing drum corps and concert (big differences) but the similarities out weigh them (thanks to amplification) and the more groups that can find that balance the more talented their membership will be.

But as I said DCI is heavily influenced by classical percussion (some more than others) because of the membership, adjudicators, and staff who are concert percussionists. The Front Ensemble is inherently different than the the Drumline because the Front Ensemble approaches is not exclusive to Outdoor playing. (Though there are some techniques such as two mallet "back fulcrum" which is almost exclusively used in out door ensembles (as opposed to front fulcrum) but 4 mallet approach in DCI is largely Steven's technique or Burton grip (for vibes) both of which come from the classical and jazz vibraphone worlds. And these approaches are only 50 - 40 years old.

[PurpleKnights]

Old pits didn't sound rinky-tink? Bull. Compare the pit breaks in SCV '89 to SCV's 'Castle On a Cloud' pit interlude this year.

There was really not a lot of complaining in that brief period between allowing amps and allowing electronics. Amping the pit has been a huge success; synthesizers have not. Yet.

[skywhopper]

If you know anything about to arrange front ensemble music not having a marimbas or vibes would kill the arrangement possibilities and the middle range elements. The ensemble would sound thin and the kind if parts you can write would be significantly hindered. We have marimbas and vibes with amplification and that is the fix for having indoor equipment outdoors. It's just inconceivable to have a DCI drum corps without marimbas/vibes. You need to have marimbas and vibes in your drum corps to be competitive it's as much a part if it has having a snare line or mellophones. This is the new normal.

I'm sure most arrangers would balk at the idea of writing music for four-part, 80-piece brass choir, too. Drum corps is NOT an indoor/concert activity. Anyway they did fine with marimbas and vibes for decades without amplification. Correct technique is different outdoors.

[charlie1223]

I'm sure most arrangers would balk at the idea of writing music for four-part, 80-piece brass choir, too. Drum corps is NOT an indoor/concert activity. Anyway they did fine with marimbas and vibes for decades without amplification. Correct technique is different outdoors.

I would argue they are doing even better with amplification.

I know what correct technique is outdoors. And it's honestly very very similar to concert percussion. In some ways it's exactly the same. Regardless of whether you are indoors or outdoors. A marimba is a marimba is a marimba. Amplification allows for a more Concert approach which is a "concert approach" because it sounds and feels the best not because it is "indoors". I don't know how else to make this clear. Drum corps needs a lot more strength and speed in many parts but a lot of the time it is about touch and mallet dexterity which are vital in classical playing. Amplification allows the instruments to be played the best way possible and produce the best sound possible in all dynamic ranges, tempos and touches.

Edited August 15, 2013 by charlie1223

[kickhaltsforlife]

Anyone remember when DCI.org allowed comments on articles? That was short lived. I remember when electronics was proposed again (this is after amplification was already legal). People wrote novels on there. I don't remember seeing one comment from a fan who was for it. And there were A LOT of comments. And then the comment sections on articles vanished... it was passed by a bunch of directors who still have their heads up in a dark and not so sanitary place, and we STILL hear CRAP being blasted at us from the front sideline by most corps. I've had to literally hold my ears for some corps the amount of crap they pump through those speakers. Cavies 2012? I thought my ears might stop bleeding... it was louder than being in an actual club.

Are there some good uses? Sure... but not nearly enough, for stuff that has been used in DCI since 2009, and in the band activity since forever. Amplification doesn't bother me one bit as long as the pit is correctly balanced. It's all the electronic crap. It's just awful. I honestly feel like the sound of drum corps was completely changed between 2008 and 2009. The artificial sounds just do not compliment this activity well at all. It hasn't really added anything. Nothing is cutting edge. It takes away the creativity we had when all we had were acoustic instruments.

I can be very back and forth on this stuff.. because I want to be accepting of new things and give them a chance. It's been 5 years of electronics... I'm 24... a liberal... and I want to unplug (not all the way... keep the mics and amps).

[drumcat]

I have to admit, it's good to get to comment once in a while again...

There's a couple of things to tease out in this argument. Specifically, there's now 4 things that go through the amps these days.

1. Percussion instrument reinforcement

2. Goo / Synth / Sampled instruments

3. Sound effects

4. Brass w/ effects

It's not simple anymore. I think you'll find that there is very, very little opposition to the reinforcement of percussion instruments. It makes sense, and as has been said, allows players to alter mallet selections and play with better technique. I wish we had it when I was in pit, but I was a few years too early.

For the most part, short-sustain instruments (percussion) work very directly through an amp setup. There is little spacial perception change because short-sustained, fast attacked instruments tend to carry similarly. Check out a pit feature in a spectral analysis, and you can nearly work out a player-piano part by printing it on paper...

For the rest of it, you get varying degrees of "success" - and by that I only mean that long-sustain instruments have to be amplified differently. Specifically when a brass ensemble directs its sound toward a direction, it's rather focused. Amplified systems right up front are not focused because the speaker cones generally put out a wide spray of sound. This requires more air to move near the amp because its sound waves dissipate at a rate *faster* than the brass section. Thus all things being equal, in row 5 the amps have to be louder, and row 75 you'll hear less amp when compared to the brass. This means that a real balance can only be achieved in one area between the two focal points, and that's the judge box. Sit on the 5 yard line, and you'll certainly understand.

In my opinion, this level of debate will continue at some level because you are introducing an "unfocused" sound point in among some very focused field instruments. It'll always sound not quite as you'd hope if you aren't in primo seats, and it presents challenges to the audio array for the recording team.

I don't think you'll find most dinosaurs think dropping percussion reinforcement is a great idea. Personally, I think that's a great way to save money and perform better than you could without it. The other three parts are coloration that takes advantage of the existing amplification "infrastructure". No matter what you jam through the amps, as long as they are sustained in some way they are going to be psychoacoustically challenging to the spacial environment of a live performance. It will *never* match the environment.

Above all, I think that the one show that comes to my mind is always 1991 SCV with Miss Saigon. I refer to that as the demonstration of the "soul" of drum corps. One of my favorite quotes is that "Art is in the resistance of the materials." I think of this show because they had to invent the sounds, and they had to make it work. They did the foley right in front of everyone, and it worked. Even if they had reinforcement at the time, you'd see a mic at the marching machine... as witnessed when Regiment did the tap shoes in.2005(?). I'm pretty sure that it isn't that there is an amp on the field; I believe it is we dinosaurs that lament the loss of that creativity and imagination. Triggering sounds and foreign instrument patches not otherwise legal and pre-recorded voice are not on their own offensive or unlikeable. Unfortunately, I believe their use shows that there is no longer a need to resist against the limitations. I sometimes think that when you hear "drum and bugle corps" that part of what people took pride in was the thought of "watch what we can do with just this stuff" or "we don't need all those marching band instruments to get our point across".

tl;dr -- it isn't that dinosaurs hate technology; it's that the technology has made the art form easier. And I know they still sell t-shirts at a booth that say "if it were easy, they'd call it marching band". Now that's calling a spade a spade.

[Jeff Ream]

aming the pit is fine. it's the synths