DCI membership votes overwhelmingly to allow ALL brass instruments in

[MikeD]

If a drum corps does not count unless they were a DCI member corps, then how would marching bands be relevant?

And my point is that DCI does not serve marching bands, and thus is actually serving less kids; it is not even close.

DCI also did not "serve" non-DCI corps back then very much either, so DCI was serving relatively few kids then as well. Replace small local corps with the thousands of competitive MB, and the relevance is obvious.

[JimF-LowBari]

Add it all as part of the pit.

When do we get a proposal to increase the pit size or allow the pit to be on the marching field?

[Michael Boo]

There you go again, Mr. Boo. Giving facts when people want to spout off about fiction. When will you learn.

I'm annoying that way.

[BRASSO]

http://www.theguardian.com/music/2004/jun/04/classicalmusicandopera

However, the list of initial good reviews of Plays, Movies, Art, Music, Literature, etc that at the time was well received, but in later years has been panned, exceeds the list of bad reviews of these idioms, that in later years was better received by future generations. This is also a fact. One ( of many that could be cited ), was the Movie " Birth of a Nation "... generally well acclaimed in its debut by most critics and most audiences. Today, it is viewed by most in its current context of today, and as such its racist overtones has it viewed much less favorably by much of todays public and today's movie critics. There are likewise hundreds of other examples of initially well received debuts that today are looked upon much less favorably as time has elapsed. Conversely, there are, Movies, Art, Music Literature, etc that stand the test of time and are viewed as brilliant works of genius even today ...just as much as they were when they were first introduced decades, hundreds, or even thousands of years ago,.We call these " The Classics ". They are timeless. And the ones on THIS list are... by far... the ones that are most remembered, most revered, and most cherished by each succeeding generation.

Edited February 14, 2014 by BRASSO

[MikeD]

However, The list of initial good reviews of Plays, Movies, Art, Music, etc that at the time was well received, but in later years has been panned, exceeds the list of bad reviews of these things, that in later years was better received by future generations. This is also a fact. One ( of many that could be cited ), was the Movie " Birth of a Nation "... generally well acclaimed in its debut by the public and most audiences. Today, it is viewed by most in its current context of today, and as such its racist overtones has it viewed much less favorably by much of todays public and todays movie critics. There are likewise hundreds of other examples of initially well received debuts that today are looked upon much less favorably as time has elapsed. And converselythere are, Movies, Art, Music, etc that stand the test of time and are viewed as brilliant works of genius today ...just as much as they were when they were introduced decades, hundreds, or thousands of years ago,.We call these " The Classics ". They are timeless. And this list is the one most remembered by each succeeeding generation.

Context of the day is always important. DW Griffith was a southerner, don't forget, so his POV springs from his background and the society of the time.

Today the view of the film is sort of fractured...many still admire the technical film-making skill while denouncing the subject.

[cixelsyd]

But I thought that the activity was marching bands now, with the new brass rule and all. I mean, it was OBVIOUSLY still drum and bugle corps with Bb, 3 valves, electronics, etc.

Did I say that? Of course not - but it is so much easier to just lump everyone together in one convenient derogatory stereotype. Carry on.

[tesmusic]

Did I say that? Of course not - but it is so much easier to just lump everyone together in one convenient derogatory stereotype. Carry on.

Sensitive much.

[barigirl78]

My context is this: the world has changed, and drum corps has suffered as much (and in many cases more) than other youth programs that are on the decline. I posit that it has less to do with DCI's evolution as an activity and more to do with environmental factors.

Again, we don't live in a vacuum, where DCI's rule changes are the only things that drive ticket sales, activity levels, etc. Market research is a big business and this is one major reason why.

On the first point, how many youth activities have evolved from something that was community-based that you could join, drive to practices, and only take a few overnight trips a year to one where even practicing required overnight trips and you had to be on the road for months at a time?

On the point of market research, I've conducted marketing research. It doesn't have to be expensive. I've conducted studies that cost my company less than $20,000. It would be even less if you used existing email and mailing lists that the corps and DCI have. I know someone who maintains the mailing list of a major corps and it contains both current DCI attendees and lapsed attendees. I'm sure all the corps have similar.

As for the labor to analyze the results of a study, I'd happily volunteer to do it for free.

I've gotten research studies from DCI in the past, by the way. So, doing research is not alien to them.

[cixelsyd]

DCI also did not "serve" non-DCI corps back then very much either, so DCI was serving relatively few kids then as well.

Maybe you were not there, but DCI shows had lots of non-member corps in them in 1975. Take a look at CorpsReps or From the Pressbox and see for yourself.

Did not serve them very much? Compared to...

Replace small local corps with the thousands of competitive MB, and the relevance is obvious.

DCI does not serve marching bands at all.

[cixelsyd]

What baffles me is where people look for ways to say the activity is not serving as many kids. They don't take the number of kids marching in total and check that with the number of kids that marched, let's say in 1999.

My point is, if the Blue Devils now have 150 members, but in 1999 they had 128 members, and the Joliet Kingsmen had 17(which they did). That makes 5 less members between 2 seperate corps in 1999, but since most people want to say that less corps means less kids, and forget about Division 2 and 3 back then, when Division 1 had smaller memberships, it's not really a valid point.

I think you need to count more than two corps to make that point.

Plus, you need to count correctly. The Joliet Kingsmen fielded 13 brass, 10 percussion and 12 guard in 1999. How does that add up to 17?

Anyway, the comment I saw pertained to 1975, a year in which over 160 corps participated in DCI-sanctioned events. I think it is safe to say there were more kids on DCI contest fields in 1975 than in 2013.

Furtermore, are kids not being served by the activity when they attend shows, or attend clinics, or camps, even if they got cut. I have many students that have gone to these types of events, not given a marching spot, but still have gained from the activity.

Well, I suppose the kid whose parent buys them a souvenir from a corps booster table is being served by the activity, if we are taking it to that extreme. But the comment that generated the pushback only alluded to how many kids were marching in the DCI context in 1975.

Hey, I probably agree much more with you than disagree. I am well aware of how beneficial those clinics are. I know that even audition camps have evolved to become a more educational experience worthy of charging admission for. And I have already said here that the issue of how many kids are marching in DCI corps right now is pretty low on the list of concerns, given how many corps are auditioning far more kids than they can put on the roster.

I just find it astonishing how much we hear about what great news this is for apples, because there are more oranges than ever.

Edited February 14, 2014 by cixelsyd