Mello Dude Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Actually, instrumentation (and what you do with it) defines what you are as a musical group. Don't believe me simply pick up a dictionary. I would replace brilliance with misguided. At the point you don't have a marketable product (modern DCi bands) you cease to have a product. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cixelsyd Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Actually from as early as 1974, there has been push to go to all key instruments, trombones, piccolos, etc. Actually, the 1974 crowd was at best bickering over whether the existing 2nd valve could be allowed as a piston instead of a rotor. But please, continue your fantasy and tell us about the rule proposals for any-key instruments, trombones and piccolos from 1974, and who their proponents were. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Actually, the 1974 crowd was at best bickering over whether the existing 2nd valve could be allowed as a piston instead of a rotor. But please, continue your fantasy and tell us about the rule proposals for any-key instruments, trombones and piccolos from 1974, and who their proponents were. Not gonna happen. Nothing to see here. The contention has been made. Move along. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 I wrote an essay called The Lost Excitement of Drum Corps Shows on my blog. I've been a fan of drum corps since the late '90s, and here I explain four reasons why I think drum corps hasn't been exciting as it used to be, including 1) the flawed reasons behind the instrumental rule changes; 2) the minimal impact on excitement that the changes have; 3) indoor stadiums are awful venues; and 4) the current judging system values technical excellence over risk and excitement. Thanks. That was good reading. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wonderbread403 Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 i agree with a lot but one thing...the performance captions are voted on by the corps. so if they are so maddening, why do they not propose to change it? Good point, Jeff. They don't propose to change it simply because most don't have the same opinion that I have (and my perspective is more of a "big picture" POV). I've seen a lot of angst and stress from instructors and caption heads over their performance numbers, but it drives them to work harder. While this has a lot of benefits for the corps and the performers (more technically excellent shows), I think there has been an overemphasis on these numbers. It drives designers and instructors to prefer safe (boring) over risk (exciting). In my crazy mind, I think there should only be three judges. All in the box--a music judge, a visual judge, an effect judge. This would emphasize to designers and caption heads that the overall product/package is the most important thing. In the real world right now, caption head's like the idea of performance judges because they believe a dedicated performance judge can give them more credit because the judge is solely observing that caption (e.g. a brass judge, two percussion judges, a guard judge). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Good point, Jeff. They don't propose to change it simply because most don't have the same opinion that I have (and my perspective is more of a "big picture" POV). I've seen a lot of angst and stress from instructors and caption heads over their performance numbers, but it drives them to work harder. While this has a lot of benefits for the corps and the performers (more technically excellent shows), I think there has been an overemphasis on these numbers. It drives designers and instructors to prefer safe (boring) over risk (exciting). In my crazy mind, I think there should only be three judges. All in the box--a music judge, a visual judge, an effect judge. This would emphasize to designers and caption heads that the overall product/package is the most important thing. In the real world right now, caption head's like the idea of performance judges because they believe a dedicated performance judge can give them more credit because the judge is solely observing that caption (e.g. a brass judge, two percussion judges, a guard judge). if it drives designers for safe and boring, then the instructors should be crying that ou dont see performer over book numbers more often. the upstairs captions are what drives designers....it's the techs job to get the on field stuff clean enough that it carries upstairs well. Several corps I've observed use what I refer to as top down cleaning.....get the big picture stuff in place, then work your way down to the field to get the nuts and bolts sparkling so upstairs shines more. Some corps use the reverse approach...both have merit. the problem with your proposal is again, the corps get to vote on how it's judged. if you don't think they focus on effect now, you're nuts. it's 40% of the number, and it's not averaged like the other captions are then divided by 2. Name me the last corps to win that did not win GE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeN Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 the problem with your proposal is again, the corps get to vote on how it's judged. if you don't think they focus on effect now, you're nuts. it's 40% of the number, and it's not averaged like the other captions are then divided by 2. Name me the last corps to win that did not win GE. 2000 Cadets. (Ok, I had to go look that one up. Cavies won GE, and Cadets and BD both tied for 2nd.) Last solo champ was the '97 Blue Devils (2nd behind Cadets). Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmjfelts1988 Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 I can't remember who they were off the top of my head, but I'm pretty sure there were a couple corps that used them last year. Nope! It's never happened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjeffeory Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Nope! It's never happened. I know Cadet's "little Jeffrey" show had some synth string sounds going on in that pre-show and maybe some synth woodwind sounds in the the middle of the show. I know, it's ok cause it's synth, but it sounded wood wind-ish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjeffeory Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Actually, instrumentation (and what you do with it) defines what you are as a musical group. Don't believe me simply pick up a dictionary. I would replace brilliance with misguided. At the point you don't have a marketable product (modern DCi bands) you cease to have a product. Hehe, I agree! This one is pretty fun though. So many people either don't get it, or they thinking about it from some totally different angle. 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.