N.E. Brigand Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 And in context to the last week's mayhem of "oh my god, trombone: the horror" going around, the fundamental sound of drum corps in 2014 will not change from 2013 (or 2005 for that matter). The horror began with synths in 2009 (well, there were some amplified voice freak shows before that); in musical terms, the additions permitted as of this week will be nothing by comparison. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henson Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 Wait - what? We've gone from allowing trombones to merging with Music For All (the parent of BOA)? That's rocketing so far beyond silly that we must be orbiting Epsilon Eridani by now. Come. ON. DCI changed a rule. One. That's it. THEY CHANGED A RULE. Some of you appear not to even know what BOA is, which might inform your opinion of the likelihood these wild-eyed conspiracy theories have of being true. Bands of America has such a different structure and mission that I seriously doubt if they would want to absorb DCI, and vice versa. Bands Of America is an operating division of a parent non-profit. That parent organization, Music For All, is not focused on marching music, but on the advocacy of music education in public schools. They aren't YEA!/USBANDS, which basically is a fundraiser for an existing drum corps. Music For All is an organization that happens to run some really well-produced high school band invitationals in addition to massive concert music festivals, camps, and other advocacy activities. When you really get down to it, they're a professional event management company that also does some lobbying and grassroots political organizing. DCI and WGI have been "strategic partners" (NOT sponsors) of Music For All for a long time. That means the three work together to promote common goals. It doesn't mean they have any intent of merging. Frankly, I think MFA is too well run to want to take on a huge liability like drum corps in its current state. More to the point, from the corps' perspectives, the way the organizations are structured at the board of directors level is so different as to make them 100% incompatible. If DCI wanted to merge with BOA, the corps would have to give up all claim to their seats within the leadership of the organization. That's the bottom line, and it's not gonna happen - no matter how much it might actually help them to have the competitive circuit business offices decouple from the corps business offices. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 Pianos are often considered percussion instruments (hammer striking strings), and guitars aren't too far off from that. I'm dubiously stretching it, but I'm OK lumping synth & guitars into brass & percussion. And in context to the last week's mayhem of "oh my god, trombone: the horror" going around, the fundamental sound of drum corps in 2014 will not change from 2013 (or 2005 for that matter). well there were no synths in 2005, but that's splitting hairs, which I'm sure Stu will do Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 (edited) Pianos are often considered percussion instruments (hammer striking strings), and guitars aren't too far off from that. I'm dubiously stretching it, but I'm OK lumping synth & guitars into brass & percussion. Acoustic Pianos are, by definition, percussion instruments because a hammer strikes a rod or string to create the sound (but what corps has ever used an acoustic piano in a DCI competitive show?). Guitars, on the other hand, are instruments in which the strings are strummed or plucked to produce a sound so they are not considered by any definition to be percussion instruments and nothing about electronic instruments is remotly close to being defined as percussive (yet these instruments have been used by corps in a DCI competitive show). And in context to the last week's mayhem of "oh my god, trombone: the horror" going around, the fundamental sound of drum corps in 2014 will not change from 2013 (or 2005 for that matter). Ahhh..... but the 'fundamental sound' of DCI corps certainly did change when Synths, Guitars, Electric Keyboards, Samplers, and other electronics were added into the musical sound pallet. Edited February 12, 2014 by Stu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Windish Posted February 12, 2014 Author Share Posted February 12, 2014 Henson, my reference to 'BOA-like' refers to appearance and performance. Not having seen it, I am under the impression BOA means a higher quality, traditional marching band with all manner of instruments and innovation. Truthfully, I can't get the ridiculous (to me) sight of body-wrapping sousaphones entering the DCI field of competition out of my mind. Same for clarinets, etc. Sorry to those who play those things masterfully. There's no question, with recent changes to DCI, the line between 'drum corps' and "traditional marching band" has blurred. When there is no longer a line, I'm probably gone, too. No matter if BOA or any other traditional band is part of the effort. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henson Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 (edited) That's fair, Fred, and I'm sorry if you felt like I was replying specifically to you as the thread starter (I wasn't). You make a distinction between the artistic identities of the competitive groups within the two circuits, and the business offices which run them. Other people don't. They're talking as if BOA is some rival group bent on infiltrating and taking over the drum corps brand for some nefarious reasons, which is just plain silly. The truth is more complicated, as I think you know. The people making artistic and educational decisions for the high-performing BOA groups are the same people - the EXACT same people - who make many of those decisions for DCI ensembles. The business side, however, is totally different. Music For All has a very strong and invested Board of Directors filled with unaffiliated business leaders who, frankly, would not put up with the shenanigans we see from the DCI "leaders." They see DCI as a partner, and they are happy to see DCI and WGI thrive, but as someone who knows some of these folks I'd put money down on the side of them having zero interest in dealing with the prima donnas who run DCI corps, and they are NOT going to vote as a board to endanger the BOA product and brand by bringing the DCI drama into their boardroom. Aside from that, the business model is completely different. Competing groups pay BOA to participate. DCI pays competing groups to perform. That just can't work if they're the same non-profit. There's a conflict of interest which affects level of service provided to the high school groups - and if you don't believe me, refer to USBands... (This is where I make my periodic disclaimer that I am not Chuck Henson. I'm just a friend and admirer of his lucky enough to share the same totally awesome last name.) Edited February 12, 2014 by Henson 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 Henson, my reference to 'BOA-like' refers to appearance and performance. Not having seen it, I am under the impression BOA means a higher quality, traditional marching band with all manner of instruments and innovation. Truthfully, I can't get the ridiculous (to me) sight of body-wrapping sousaphones entering the DCI field of competition out of my mind. Same for clarinets, etc. Sorry to those who play those things masterfully. There's no question, with recent changes to DCI, the line between 'drum corps' and "traditional marching band" has blurred. When there is no longer a line, I'm probably gone, too. No matter if BOA or any other traditional band is part of the effort. there really is only one line left....woodwinds. now it's anybodys guess how soon the proposal is sent from allentown to DCI HQ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 (edited) That's fair, Fred, and I'm sorry if you felt like I was replying specifically to you as the thread starter (I wasn't). You make a distinction between the artistic identities of the competitive groups within the two circuits, and the business offices which run them. Other people don't. They're talking as if BOA is some rival group bent on infiltrating and taking over the drum corps brand for some nefarious reasons, which is just plain silly. The truth is more complicated, as I think you know. The people making artistic and educational decisions for the high-performing BOA groups are the same people - the EXACT same people - who make many of those decisions for DCI ensembles. The business side, however, is totally different. Music For All has a very strong and invested Board of Directors filled with unaffiliated business leaders who, frankly, would not put up with the shenanigans we see from the DCI "leaders." They see DCI as a partner, and they are happy to see DCI and WGI thrive, but as someone who knows some of these folks I'd put money down on the side of them having zero interest in dealing with the prima donnas who run DCI corps, and they are NOT going to vote as a board to endanger the BOA product and brand by bringing the DCI drama into their boardroom. Aside from that, the business model is completely different. Competing groups pay BOA to participate. DCI pays competing groups to perform. That just can't work if they're the same non-profit. There's a conflict of interest which affects level of service provided to the high school groups - and if you don't believe me, refer to USBands... (This is where I make my periodic disclaimer that I am not Chuck Henson. I'm just a friend and admirer of his lucky enough to share the same totally awesome last name.) I commented on your interpretation of the business structure limitations of the two groups in another thread but, to summarize, several (many) of the DCI BOD believe that DCI's role is exactly the same as BOA's, that is, to promote the tour. If accepted as true, it would suggest synergies and efficiencies that can be gained for the benefit of both organizations if those promotional efforts were combined. It's particularly handy that the fall MB tour and summer DCI tour are in different seasons. Your thoughts about revenue flows preventing any sort of merger are too limited. There is nothing to suggest that the two, distinct revenue flows of the two organizations (BOA and DCI) need to be similar in any way. The non-profit MFA could very easily structure the two sub-divisions to operate on different revenue/cost planes. Bands could continue to pay BOA for tour and organizational functions while DCI could continue to pay MFA for marketing and promotion efforts while still paying out the remainder of its revenues to the corps. MFA could charge a fee for promotion that wouldn't be unlike what DCI "charges" the corps now for the same services. EDIT: The "drama" of the dysfunction of DCI's leadership could be contained to the DCI board room. The fight would come in when or if some corps directors believe that MFA, like the DCI organization, is too expensive and needs to charge less for the services provided. But if the corps directors are seeing increased efficiency in the promotion of the DCI tour from MFA, much of that "drama" would evaporate. Edited February 12, 2014 by garfield 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeN Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 there really is only one line left....woodwinds. now it's anybodys guess how soon the proposal is sent from allentown to DCI HQ 2016, unless they decide to change the rules and have a vote sooner. (Not like that's ever happened before...) Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 I commented on your interpretation of the business structure limitations of the two groups in another thread but, to summarize, several (many) of the DCI BOD believe that DCI's role is exactly the same as BOA's, that is, to promote the tour. If accepted as true, it would suggest synergies and efficiencies that can be gained for the benefit of both organizations if those promotional efforts were combined. It's particularly handy that the fall MB tour and summer DCI tour are in different seasons. Your thoughts about revenue flows preventing any sort of merger are too limited. There is nothing to suggest that the two, distinct revenue flows of the two organizations (BOA and DCI) need to be similar in any way. The non-profit MFA could very easily structure the two sub-divisions to operate on different revenue/cost planes. Bands could continue to pay BOA for tour and organizational functions while DCI could continue to pay MFA for marketing and promotion efforts while still paying out the remainder of its revenues to the corps. MFA could charge a fee for promotion that wouldn't be unlike what DCI "charges" the corps now for the same services. EDIT: The "drama" of the dysfunction of DCI's leadership could be contained to the DCI board room. The fight would come in when or if some corps directors believe that MFA, like the DCI organization, is too expensive and needs to charge less for the services provided. But if the corps directors are seeing increased efficiency in the promotion of the DCI tour from MFA, much of that "drama" would evaporate. EDIT2: That said, one DCI director said he'd never be a part of an organization in which he had no control, and THAT might prevent that corps from going along with a MFA/DCI merger. 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.