corpsband Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 The foundation to what you are saying is that their were more members marching in drum corps in a given year BITD than there are today (let's just assume that's true even though I believe that number is irrelevant because there are without a doubt more students participating in the marching arts now than there have ever been. Including ALL marching arts not just drum corps) And then you assume that the distribution of talent would be exactly the same across the whole activity no matter the year. You assume this when you say that "BITD drum corps had both more talented and less talented performers." So lets pick random numbers and say BITD there were 6000 drumcorps marching members in any given year and 4000 today. (again, the numbers are to indulge your assumption). Then lets say that 1/3 are talented (2,000) and 2/3 are not talented (4,000) BITD. Why would you assume this ratio will be the same today? It could be that today the ratio of "talented" and "untalented" to be much larger lets say 2/3 talented (2,667)and 1/3 not talented (1,333). In this case there would be far more individually talented musicians in drum corps as whole than there ever were BITD. The ratios are arbitrary and your assumption could be proven correct if the ratios were flipped but there is really no way to know the ratio of talented vs. untalented BITD without only making an educated guess. But from the description of kids being picked up off the street and given a horn to play I can imagine that there were more untalented members than talented members. thank you. maybe i need a break from DCP as i totally lacked the patience to explain this :-/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott St Sinclaire Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 If the activity wants to survive... then it needs to evolve...end of story. In reality... high school marching bands and drum corps are essentially on paper no different and havent been since the 1970's... its not about instrumentation....its about design. The only reason instrumentation in the past was an issue of not being considered was PRACTICALITY...not about preserving some ridiculous instrument tradition.... it was about dollars and cents... in the past, when there were more than 3x the amount of corps... DCI and the Rules Congress rejected some of these instruments proposals as not to give "more financially stable corps" an unfair advantage. (*hence the brass rule of allowing any key instruments back in 2000... corps still can use G Bugles if they wish... its just not economically feasible nor practical (not to mention the sound/tone quality of G bugles in comparison to Bb/F/double Bb instruments is light years). Some people oppose change, no matter what it is... its frightening for them.... hey, time doesnt stand still... the clock ticks and the years pass and yes, you are getting closer to death. Culture, technology, society changes around you whether you're on board or not and for a variety of reasons. think about why modern day sporting events are played the way they are and metered, ref'd the way they are.... In the world of entertainment, art, sport, design, etc. stagnation and refusal to change and push the envelope ceases to exist the very entertainment, art, sport and design. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mello Dude Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 (edited) The other side of the coin are the people that push change and really are ignorant about everything that its entailed. Yes, getting band instrumentation was a dollars and cents issue. Light years on the sound quality? What sound are we trying to achieve? Do we want a "drum corps" sound or do we want something unremarkable like a marching brass band sound? Yes corps can still use G bugles. Yes the judges can put that corps at the bottom because most if not all current judges don't understand the overtone series of a bugle or simply don't want to see them on the field ever again because it's not what DCI wants. Is drum corps as activity better off than it was 20 or 30 years ago? Really that's the metric to what it should be held accountable to. Edited February 20, 2014 by Mello Dude 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cixelsyd Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 If the activity wants to survive... then it needs to evolve...end of story. In reality... high school marching bands and drum corps are essentially on paper no different and havent been since the 1970's... its not about instrumentation....its about design. The only reason instrumentation in the past was an issue of not being considered was PRACTICALITY...not about preserving some ridiculous instrument tradition.... it was about dollars and cents... Unlike that first part, what you say here is actually correct. in the past, when there were more than 3x the amount of corps... DCI and the Rules Congress rejected some of these instruments proposals as not to give "more financially stable corps" an unfair advantage. And what has changed since then? Having less corps does not make it any wiser to pass rule changes that (as you acknowledge above) favor the well-financed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
funkjazzaxe Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 (edited) The sports analogy is actually kind of a weak one... MLB still uses wooden bats for goodness sake! The way athletes train for sports has certainly changed, the skill and speed of most sports has certainly increased, but what makes it amazing is that sports still have the basic elements they have always had. The current DCI mentality is to strip away everything that defined the game and just make it a big free for all. Most sports rules are basically the same as they have been since that sports formation, and most sports rules changes are inacted to keep the sport true to the pure athletic element that defines it. Soon as technology starts to give an advantage or redefine it, rules are inacted to keep it pure (too many examples to list... limits on golf clubs/balls, limits on basic bicycle design in pro cycling, wood bats in MLB, etc etc etc) Edited February 20, 2014 by funkjazzaxe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 (edited) In reality... high school marching bands and drum corps are essentially on paper no different and havent been since the 1970's... its not about instrumentation....its about design. If you think the instrumentation isn't important, that's your opinion. Some of us think instrumentation is THE difference between MB and DC. Just like the differences between String Bands, Bagpipe groups, brass bands, orchestras, string quartets, etc, etc, you get the idea right.... If design is your bag and that's the only thing you go by fine. But some of your comments are insulting to those of us who go to corps shows because we like the sound. And just to be clear I'm not talking G vs Bb because I can't tell the difference. Edited February 20, 2014 by JimF-LowBari 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 (edited) I see you're alluding to the discussion about allowing more/different instrumentation and electronics. Drum corps is a different activity than high school or college marching band-different history, different traditions, different types of members. I don't see those distinctions as being a bad thing. Different doesn't mean good or bad, just different. Interesting as we had few competing MBs in the 70s in my part of PA. Had some (about 12-24) join our local Sr corps and remember some of them saying the reason they enjoyed being in the corps was because it was so different. 30+ years later heard some of the members of my Alumni type corps express the same feelings. These were people who never did corps before so doing all brass/perc was an eye opener to them. Even in the parade/standstill only world. Edited February 20, 2014 by JimF-LowBari 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
funkjazzaxe Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 (edited) I know kids who recently marched/still march, heck I am not that old- marched just prior to Bb coming on board. I also recently served on the board for a world class corps. None of the kids I know/knew want drum corps to be just like marching band. Debate me all you want, but I don't know anyone in the activity that won't quickly correct someone who calls their corps a "band"- that aspect hasn't changed. The recent drastic changes to drum corps haven't been pushed by the kids, or the audience for that matter. As far as current vs former members, one thing that has changed is the integration of electronics/computers/processing into popular music. Its hard to find any popular music now that isnt highly processed. Kids now have grown up hearing auto-tuned robotic voices, heavily pitch/time corrected tracks, the use of machines to replace live musicians in the studio. I can understand their easier acceptance of synths and electronics, they don't see them as being "fake" as much as people do who came up when it was all accoustic. That said, most kids I know don't like the use of electronics as a crutch- especially using power amps/synths to add impact and volume. Its like using a Dr. Beat to supplement the drum line, and I feel most kids see it this way and just play along with what the design team mandates. That's what frustrates me with all of it- the changes don't seem to stem from member or fan demand. Edited February 20, 2014 by funkjazzaxe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 (edited) If the activity wants to survive, then it needs to evolve; end of story. Has anyone offered any evidence at all that proves that instrumentation changes are the kind of evolution that will help drum corps survive? You haven't. There is nothing in your post that demonstrates this. All I see is your preference for changes that "push the envelope", but that's all it is: a preference. Edited February 20, 2014 by N.E. Brigand 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott St Sinclaire Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 The sports analogy is actually kind of a weak one... MLB still uses wooden bats for goodness sake! The way athletes train for sports has certainly changed, the skill and speed of most sports has certainly increased, but what makes it amazing is that sports still have the basic elements they have always had. The current DCI mentality is to strip away everything that defined the game and just make it a big free for all. Most sports rules are basically the same as they have been since that sports formation, and most sports rules changes are inacted to keep the sport true to the pure athletic element that defines it. Soon as technology starts to give an advantage or redefine it, rules are inacted to keep it pure (too many examples to list... limits on golf clubs/balls, limits on basic bicycle design in pro cycling, wood bats in MLB, etc etc etc) baseball has bigger diamonds, new batting rules, new RBI classifications, roster restrictions, touring restrictions...bats are now weighted differently than they were 30 years ago, the ball is different design, rules about uniforms and field gear,practice,etc. stadiums are designed for maximum ticket sales (night) and televised rights as well (its all about money, not about the sport and definitely not preserving the sport)... nascar,nfl fifa (the biggest sport association and organization in the world), etc. have all transformed and evolved.... perhaps you might want to challenge using another comparison or example; this one (sports) is weighted against your plight...then again,its okay, a lot of band people arent familiar with sports & fitness. 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.