Rules Congress

[MikeD]

The real differences between both Band and corps are these-

Very few privately owned or operated marching bands in the US for youth. Most are run under school auspices. Lehighton, PA had some private organization, I don't know if they still do. Burlington, Ontario has a town band for youth, some small ones run under various civic organizations in Quebec.

The other real difference that separates, and is the big selling point for many kids wanting to perform in DCI or DCA is this-- Do you want to be part of an organization where you don't have kids in it that are only there because Mommy and Daddy make them participate? Do you want to be where people want to be there and be excellent, and aren't there because they can get free trips to the football games with great seats or hang with their friends? Where you're not thought of as some kind of appendage to the football program and have to sit though crappy football games and still get made fun of by the jocks who don't have enough brain cells to learn the first 5 pages of the drill you do?? (My HS program was widely recognized by PA football mavens as the worst in the state.) Those are two of the main separators to me. It certainly made my experiences at Westshore more enriching for those two reasons alone. I could probably think of more.

But the all-volunteer aspect, not run by school districts, and the fact the organization exists primarily to compete at a high level (Parades, outreach still done but secondary) with no fiddling and interference from mostly ignorant school admins and school boards (there are some exceptions) are what really differ the forms.

Yeah, one has woodwinds, the other doesn't. There are some other points I could parse out more carefully but those could be more arguable.

Here in NJ, many marching bands, at last those that compete, have gone to the volunteer route. The band I teach has been all-volunteer for decades. It hurts the numbers in the MB ( we march a total of 50, inc guard, while there are 160+ in the band program), but it does make it an organization where the members are focused on excellence, much like drum corps.

[Jeff Ream]

Mike, on a slight tangent: I think you've been a judge in the scholastic arena, right? If a high school band didn't have woodwinds--as is true of a handful of high school bands in Ohio, including at least one which competes--would you score them lower than a band of equivalent design and performance levels which did have woodwinds, on that basis? (For that matter, while it's far less likely, what about a band without brass?)

I wouldn't. it's all about how you use what you have, not if you're lacking something

[dhawtho1]

Jeff

I think it would depend on the sheets your using and the particular state your in. Do the sheets specifically talk about woodwind textures and such.

Hard to say. If a band creates a lot of interest in textures and voicing. Presents challenges to their members in the written score. Balance and intonation even within the harshest conditions. They are exposing their ensemble to error more often than brass.

[Fran Haring]

My preference is for an "anything goes" division, including marching as many as they wish. However...to come up with 128 and 150 sizes, these would work for me

picc 2 2

flute 8 12

clarinet 10 12

alto 6 8

tenor 2 4

bari 4 6

tpt 12 16

mello 6 8

tbn/bari 10 12

tuba 8 10

snare 6 6

tenor 4 4

bass 5 5

pit 12 12

cg 32 32

dm 1 1

total 128 150

You're wrong.

I would go with two less flutes and add two piccolos.

[camel lips]

You're wrong.

I would go with two less flutes and add two piccolos.

4 piccolos could drown out a entire TRUMPET section.

[posaun1]

Really? Because several people in this thread, arguing in favor of allowing synthesizers, have said that they are necessary to attract younger members, who believe that corps must have synthesizers to be good (even though almost none of them will be performing on the synthesizer). That sure sounds like setting standards to match the students' tastes to me. If you're saying that high school band directors are telling students that a musical ensemble must have a synthesizer to be good, then shame on them.

Really. They synthesizer is not the driving force in attracting younger members. Many younger members join to enhance their pre-existing band experience. Many students come from very competitive marching bands that utilize many different instruments including synths. Synthesizers do not necessarily make an ensemble good or bad. How that synth is used does make a determination as to whether it is. The same way that a corps that has a bad technique building package will not be as good as a corps that does have a good technique package. The synth is just another tool that can be used to enhance a show. If you believe that is setting the standards to match the student's tastes you are entitled to that opinion, however, I can say that it comes more from the design team's tastes and standards. Since most design teams are filled with professional educators who utilize this technology with their own programs I would say that it comes from what we know works. As far as band directors telling students that a musical ensemble must have a synth to be good, I can only speak from my own experiences as an educator and an adjudicator and state that when used in a well thought out way the synth can be an effective tool. When not used well it can be a detriment. There is much new literature for wind band that includes synth parts. It is becoming a norm for much of the 21st century music that is being composed. Music changes. New instruments are added. Had Christofori not decided that he wanted more dynamics or the ability to be expressive with his playing the piano might not have been invented and we would still be listening to harpsichords and clavichords. For years after Mozart wrote his Requiem people were amazed and dumbfounded that he used a trombone as a solo instrument with the orchestra. The point being that there were critics of these innovations. Not that there is anything wrong with the sound of a harpsichord or a sackbutte, but the ear likes what the ear likes. 20, 30, 40,50 years down the road when this is the norm and someone decided to add holographic images and some new instruments (perhaps holophoners for all you Futurama fans) I am certain there will be those who say NO! THIS ISN'T DRUM CORPS. I often look at old drum corps videos from the 60's and 70's and think THANK GOD THE ACTIVITY HAS GROWN AND EVOLVED. I watch drum corps from the 80's and 90's, which was my favorite period of drum corps and think THANK GOD THE ACTIVITY HAS GROWN AND EVOLVED. I watch it from 2000 on and wonder where is the activity going and how cool is it going to be! Music is organic. It changes and grows and evolves. Anything that doesn't change becomes stagnant and dies.

[BigW]

Here in NJ, many marching bands, at last those that compete, have gone to the volunteer route. The band I teach has been all-volunteer for decades. It hurts the numbers in the MB ( we march a total of 50, inc guard, while there are 160+ in the band program), but it does make it an organization where the members are focused on excellence, much like drum corps.

Not... quite... the same.

There are still prolly a few kids there that Mom and Dad make them do it. And yes, it's a problem in NJ when you have several thousand kids in a regional HS in many instances with 30 or less musicians in the band. Many school boards, parents, and local folk think a band is better when it's BIG. Even when it's a big, sloppy, droning 300 piece band with two kids in tiger costumes running around in the formations during the show. Yeah, I've seen it.

It may be "more" like DCA and DCI, but it's still not quite the same. Emphases in scholastic programs also make a difference. Understandably so.

Even with DCA staff working with a High School program, how many students actually gut it out and stick with a DCA unit? Some may be more successful than others, but even DCA is culling less than half a percent of the HS kids into their ranks when you spread out the potential. You end up with the most determined of the determined. It makes for a difference. And I don't mean most talented. The most determined and teachable. Anyone not determined nor teachable is gone by March or April at best.

[BigW]

Lehighton still has a community band program which provides lessons for any student in the area free of charge.

Thanks, Scott. As of the early 90's I was aware it still existed, but over the years, hadn't heard of anything. I'm out of the loop here in Harrisburg.

From what I remember of the town when I drive through it in the mid 80's, it's a good thing and a good tradition that they have.

[N.E. Brigand]

My preference is for an "anything goes" division, including marching as many as they wish.

Do you think there's any danger that if this happened, either:

(1) Because many organizations wouldn't want the logistical challenges of dealing with larger numbers, you'd have a division with just two or three corps, which by definition means the same corps were always medalling?

or

(2) A handful of corps would thus swallow up all of the members, putting the corps in the limited-size division out of business, or forcing them to be really small? Atlanta CV goes unlimited, pulls lots of members from Alliance, who either fold or can field nothing larger than a minicorps, for example?

[N.E. Brigand]

IMO a judge should evaluate what is presented, not what they wish were presented. If a band has WW, but the charts and drill are written so that their contribution is minimized... like writing brass-doubled parts for most of the show, and/or using the WW to just fill out forms at the edges or in the back primarily, then that would impact their score with me. If they do not have them, then it would not impact how I judge that band.

When I was judging a lot, what I used to do is actually count the instruments, primarily in the smaller size classes, to get an idea of what I might expect to hear... and I would judge based on that. I'd write the instrument counts down on the sheets as a note to myself, actually. If they marched two clarinets, I would not expect to hear much clarinet sound, for instance.

A long-winded way to say no, the mere presence or lack of particular instrument voices in and of itself would not impact my score... they use made of what they have is the key driver.

Now...if the circuit had placed requirements on the sheets to judge differently then the above, then of course I would have to judge based on the stated criteria.

OK. Thanks very much for that reply.

So a question for anyone:

Do we think that DCI judges are following your lead as regards synthesizers? If a corps doesn't have any synthesizers, they'll be judged based on the instrumentation that they do have? Or have judges told corps that they need synthesizers?

And what about amplified pit percussion? The Cavaliers had a great pit sound in the early 2000s, and they voted against allowing amplification, and when that rule change passed, their director said that they didn't need amplification and wouldn't be using it. But then partway through the 2004 season, they changed their mind. Were the judges telling them they had to have it? Have judges been doing so since? Or when a corps, like Legends this year, opts not to amplify the pit, are the judges accepting that this can be an appropriate musical choice?

And how have (for amplification) and will (for electronics) the judges in DCA behave(d) in this regard?