DCI membership votes overwhelmingly to allow ALL brass instruments in

[jjeffeory]

I was going off what I heard from designers. Sorry for being mistaken. Since Madison proposed it, would make since that they would use it.

Just teasing. Thing is, there is no 100% guarantee or anything, even when an authority or designer says so.

People like to change their mind and people don't always do what they say they're going to do. Just like at every presidential campaign...

[thewsquared]

I just want to see Phantom use a trombone as a weapon to kill someone with. Maybe like a sliding guillotine or spear thing.

[N.E. Brigand]

People like to change their mind, and people don't always do what they say they're going to do. Just like at every presidential campaign.

If you mean that candidates don't always follow through on their promises, absolutely. And not just political candidates. it seems many DCI rule-change proposals have been predicated on false notions, like the idea that amplification would allow corps to save money by no longer doubling their pit instrumentation.

If you mean that the voters change their minds during the course of the campaign, while of course that's also true, it may be less so than is popularly perceived. (Note to moderators: my subject is about polling, not actual politics!) During the 2012 election season, three separate polling analysts, Nate Silver of the New York Times (now moved to ESPN), Sam Wang at the Princeton Election Consortium, and Drew Linzer of Votamatic all held, based on their studies of all the polls combined, that various minor ups and downs reported breathlessly by the media were misleading, and that any actual changes in voter preferences were consistently too small to affect the final outcome (of the major race) they'd been predicting since the summer. In fact, Linzer correctly predicted the exact final electoral college vote as early as June of that year. Anybody arguing about truman's recent DCP poll (from whatever position) might benefit by reading some of the analysis by those three polling experts.

[Stu]

.the BD staff didnt try to take things as literal as some people seem to think...unless you have some inside knowledge well then I wouldnt assume so much. my friend......it's just drum corps.......lol

as far as who is making more out of something than what it was If you look back I said people....not all.....I never ( or try not to ) refer to any opinion as ALL ( like some love to ).....so to those who dont take everything to serious and literal....good for you...the others? well , if the shoe fits and youre ok with going out to a show, hating on it, picking it to pieces, finding fault with everything from music to plume color,,, then that must bring some enjoyment to you also.....so everyone wins I guess if one chooses to believe or not believe how a staff may put things together thats their choice. I try to never assume ( which I'm sure I fall short at times ) and only try to comment when I have some knowledge of either the situation or the individuals.....not that anyone has to believe me.....not trying to change anyone's mind just my point of view.

Oh you also asked WHY designers do whatever they do and I answered...because they want to and can....enough of an answer?.......lol

My contention was not an assumption; the cerebral meaning behind the design of the BD Cabaret Voltaire Dada show certainly was intentional; and that historical and artistic depth was intimately conveyed to the judging community throughout the entire season so that the judges would be able to garner the ‘engagement’ required to score high on the sheets. The paying audience, however, was left to either be perplexed and confused or to do some extensive research on their own in order to receive anywhere close the level of ‘engagement’ received by the judges. I would have no problems with that if the venue was either a concert hall at an academic institution or a small theater in an arts district where people gather to contemplate Deep Thoughts by Jack Handy. However, I do have a problem with it if one of the goals is to sell as many seats of a 65,000 stadium as possible with ticket paying fans who desire high quality entertainment not highbrow intellectual edification. Angels and Demons, on the other hand, was a prime example of how a show design can portray ‘meaning’ without requiring the audience to contemplate something akin to the intellectual rationalizations concerning the essence of righteousness and evil in order to be 'engaged' with the show.

[N.E. Brigand]

Stu, how do you know what BD was telling the judges? Not meaning that you're wrong; just curious about your sources. And why did none of the judges respond as a few people on these forums have done, both in this thread and back in 2012: that intellectually, BD's show was a fraud because it was not Dada at all?

Mind you, I'm not sure that "Angels and Demons" was intellectually effective either. Angels and demons fight and the angels win because ... well, who knows? If it were simply foreordained because one side was right and one was wrong, that's both unengaging (because there's no real suspense) and unhelpful (because in life, the good are frequently on the losing side).

Edited February 24, 2014 by N.E. Brigand

[Jeff Ream]

Now i can like or dislike that show BUT can I find something of quality within it even if I don't agree or like the theme?...I like to think so , especially when you talk these top corps. I may not like approach or theme BUT can the quality of a product in all areas over shine the theme or intellect ...Well for me it can, although i can undestand those who can't get past it.

Point is there's one example you gave.....isnt there enough within a finals and prelims to satisfy everyone? Isn't there enough variety or diversity? I think so. Many ( as they claim ) dont care about scores, so does it really mattter if one or 2 corps dont follow the path of traditional and follow a path of controversial......does it really matter?

I still say we give ourselves way to much credit sometimes in the activity. As many do say " Its just drum corps" we march around a football field, wearing feathers in our hats, wearing sparkly objects.throwing wood objects and fabric, playing loud all for about 13 min....and yes we love it...all that deep?....hmmmmmm not so sure about that.

I'm not talking like or dislike. I'm talking the triad of effect and it's application. It's harped on in clinic after clinic in every judges association out there that to truly be effective, one must touch all parts of the triad a lot.

Edited February 24, 2014 by Jeff Ream

[Jeff Ream]

Wait so you don't think the opening trumpet solo and recap at the end wasn't showing emotion? I thought it was beautiful. That moment after the fanfare didn't have you dumbfounded because you thought there would be this big climactic note but there wasn't? How did you not feel melancholy in the Gymnopedie No. 1? Maybe I'm just way into drum corps, but I think there were many emotional/aesthetically pleasing moments in that show.

ok so in an 11 minute show, you give me a whole whopping 2 moments.

[Stu]

... how do you know what BD was telling the judges? Not meaning that you're wrong; just curious about your sources.

Each corps design staff provides in-depth explanations to the judges both prior to and during the season. These explanations are not provided to the general audience and thus the judges receive more in-depth 'engagement' than does the general audience.

... And why did none of the judges respond as a few people on these forums have done, both in this thread and back in 2012: that intellectually, BD's show was a fraud because it was not Dada at all?

a) There was no way to present real Dada on the field and comply with the DCI judging sheets; just as there was no way to present the actual Les Mis production or the actual opera Einstein on the Beach. This is not fraud, but merely adaptation to a particular medium.

b) As for the reasons behind lack of public communication from the DCI judges and DCI corps staff, you would have to ask them.

... Mind you, I'm not sure that "Angels and Demons" was intellectually effective either. Angels and demons fight and the angels win because ... well, who knows? If it were simply foreordained because one side was right and one was wrong, that's both unengaging (because there's no real suspense) and unhelpful (because in life, the good are frequently on the losing side).

Ahhhh, you see this type of analyzing was not required for the general audience to become ‘engaged’ with Angels and Demons yet it won DCI. That show design accomplished both ‘engaging’ the judges and ‘engaging’ the general audience without the need for intellectual edification; where as Cabaret Voltaire only engaged the judges and a select few in the general audience who were educated on the historical aspects of the Cabaret Voltaire. Again if you want to educate and appeal to the intellect in order to 'engage' you will have to also be willing to perform to an extremely smaller audience than if you want to entertain as a means of 'engagement'; Intellectual engagement will pack a small academic classroom but will leave a pro stadium an echo chamber.

Edited February 24, 2014 by Stu

[Geneva]

For the record, not that I feel that my opinion matters much anymore, I think this decision by the DCI board members is a bad one which makes little sense for a number of reasons. I think it will definitely evolve into an expensive novelty variation on the core mission of what drum corps does best and will contribute only marginally to the musical production as today's pit does as well. From a visual standpoint it can only obfuscate the uniformity and clarity of the image.

Sousaphones have always seemed like a musically inferior solution to the need for a marching bass presence that the shoulder carried contras and tubas were a much better answer for. Hand muted french horns will definitely require amplification to be appreciated and are just plain clumsy to march with as are trombones.

The drum corps brand obviously is not that important to today's leaders of the activity who seem to be pursuing a goal which now seems quite foreign to me. I never felt like a dinosaur and thought I had a liberal view of the activity even though I have been involved since 1965. However, these proposed changes could alter the form of the activity such that it no longer exists in my mind...and that makes me sad.

[GUARDLING]

My contention was not an assumption; the cerebral meaning behind the design of the BD Cabaret Voltaire Dada show certainly was intentional; and that historical and artistic depth was intimately conveyed to the judging community throughout the entire season so that the judges would be able to garner the ‘engagement’ required to score high on the sheets. The paying audience, however, was left to either be perplexed and confused or to do some extensive research on their own in order to receive anywhere close the level of ‘engagement’ received by the judges. I would have no problems with that if the venue was either a concert hall at an academic institution or a small theater in an arts district where people gather to contemplate Deep Thoughts by Jack Handy. However, I do have a problem with it if one of the goals is to sell as many seats of a 65,000 stadium as possible with ticket paying fans who desire high quality entertainment not highbrow intellectual edification. Angels and Demons, on the other hand, was a prime example of how a show design can portray ‘meaning’ without requiring the audience to contemplate something akin to the intellectual rationalizations concerning the essence of righteousness and evil in order to be 'engaged' with the show.

well you assume an awful lot....again I will say.were talking 1 corps...so what! and if they are talked about as much as they have been ...seems they engaged something....1 corps...1 show....lets move on.....BD HAS engaged many in many different ways....maybe not the way some would like BUT,,Oh well.