A question for the purists: was there more that could have been done?

[StunnedMonkey]

48 minutes ago, ouooga said:

I see a lot of people talk about "the old days" and "before we had electronics" and "g bugles" and "why are they dancing?" and "where's the drill" and "why is there a stage?" and so on. 

 

I'm personally a fan of the new stuff, but this isn't about me defending it. I want to ask the purists on here, was there more that could have been done with the old style(s)?

 

Go back to 1999, or 1989, or any year that you consider to be "the last year of real drum corps", and take that into the present and beyond. Was there more that could have been done within that box of rules? Ideas that weren't explored, music that got lost, drill that never saw the light of day, etc? Or would we have seen the same ideas perpetuated over and over forever? If the latter, is that the goal?

 

Just something that's been on my mind. I'm curious to hear the thoughts.

Yeah, I think you'd really need to go back to pre-1983 to really be in a Purist era, though one could argue that it ended later when they ditched the bugles.

What could have been done withing the context of the old rules? Well, just about everything that did get done so far as drill design and music. DCI was a much more visceral experience "back in the day."  It's impossible to describe what sitting on the 50 in front of Madison's 1980 horn line was like, the sopranos lined up on the sideline playing Malguena full volume into you face. No recording can convey that.

I get that the modern day fan thinks that we'll all a bunch of old fogeys. But 30 years from now when you've been away from the activity for many years and you decide to catch a show and it's a solo singer suspended from wires, 140 jazz dancers, an electronic drum machine, dueling mixers, a laser light show with pyrotechnics, three mic'd brass players on the sideline playing short fills, suspended big screen TV's, and the whole thing looks like a Beyonce Super Bowl Halftime extravaganza...then you'll understand how we old "purists" feel today.

 

Or something.

[Tim K]

As someone who remembers the shock of the Bridgemen in 1976, a corps considered an "old school" classic today, I remember how some felt though I was too young to understand why there was a fuss, saw 27th and Phantom when their classic guards were in their heyday and were quite innovative at the time, saw the then Garfield Cadets rise along with Cavies, saw the classic shows of the 80's and 90's, they all pushed boundaries. Even in the days of the tic system, Blue Devils and SCV were innovators. 

I would love to see more old style shows, it's not going to happen. For one thing, we don't have feeder corps and kids are not trained with g bugles and color guard techniques . You didn't just audition at age 18 and learn these things. It's a whole mindset kids come from school programs today. It's not better or worse, just different. Also, the shows of the past reflected their time. Today, technology is a reality. I'm willing to bet as little as ten years ago, some corps may have banned cell phones. Today it is probably not a consideration. 

Now if you were to tell me less electronics, fewer props, not changing uniforms every year as a way of keeping costs down so drum corps would be more affordable and more scholarship fund would be available, I'd support it in a heartbeat. Turning back the clock, even if I'd love to see it, won't happen.

[N.E. Brigand]

1 hour ago, Anstigback said:

 I wish things just paused with shows like the ones performed from years 2000 to about 2011.

Interesting. During most of that time, amplification was allowed, and for the most part, that didn't really make for better shows. It didn't always hurt, and most of the time it probably had no effect on the overall quality one way or the other, but I think it hurt more often than it helped. I suspect a vast majority of fans would have liked BD 2005 and Cadets 2007 more if they didn't have amplified voice.

Edited August 9, 2017 by N.E. Brigand

[Ediker]

Activities like this have to either evolve or they die. A significant percentage of old timers, myself included, will hate many changes. Changes often correct (electronics use will likely be reformed).  Staying the same means, at best, surviving. The conditions that made the old ways work are simply gone. This is a new generation, different from boomers gen x, and gen y. 

[Bobby L. Collins]

1 hour ago, ouooga said:

I see a lot of people talk about "the old days" and "before we had electronics" and "g bugles" and "why are they dancing?" and "where's the drill" and "why is there a stage?" and so on. 

 

I'm personally a fan of the new stuff, but this isn't about me defending it. I want to ask the purists on here, was there more that could have been done with the old style(s)?

 

Go back to 1999, or 1989, or any year that you consider to be "the last year of real drum corps", and take that into the present and beyond. Was there more that could have been done within that box of rules? Ideas that weren't explored, music that got lost, drill that never saw the light of day, etc? Or would we have seen the same ideas perpetuated over and over forever? If the latter, is that the goal?

 

Just something that's been on my mind. I'm curious to hear the thoughts.

Absolutely they could have done more.  And to quote Saboo from The Mighty Boosh, "The box is there for a reason".

One of the biggest criticisms I read about G bugles is how hard to play they were and how out of tune they were (criticisms almost universally voiced by individuals who have never even held a bugle, much less played one).  Well let me tell you something.  The only thing wrong with G bugles was the individuals playing them, and the instructors trying to teach  said individuals how to play them.  You can't listen to Phantom 94's ballad or Spirit 80's closer or Madison 75's concert piece and try to act like those kids didn't know how to play those bugles.  In 1997, i spent the entire summer playing a 2 valve soprano, and it was no harder to play than my intermediate model Yamaha trumpet, or any Bach Stradivarius or Yamaha Xeno I had ever (or have still ever) played.  That bugle made me a better player and a better musician, and any intonation issues it had were entirely on MY end.  At the end of the day, it is the responsibility of the performer to play in tune, not the equipment.  And in many cases throughout the years with many different corps, the instructors simply didn't emphasize intonation, and it wouldn't have made a difference if they were playing on concert equipment, or bugles,  or even vuvuzelas.  Since that time I've played piston rotors and 3 valve bugles, and again, the only intonation issues I ever had were the result of the player, not the horns.  A lot of people like to act like playing bugles was like playing a Conn 16E mellophone, and the bottom line is that very few of those people ever even played a bugle (or a 16E, for that matter), and they don't know their brass from a hole in the ground.  And they have certainly never stood in front of a bugle line live.  They like to cite modern parking lot warmups of trumpets, mellophones, baritones and tubas playing unison lip slurs or alternating between fortissississimo pedal tones and open fifths, and gush about how great it sounds, and ask questions like "How can you even compare G bugles with this sound?"  and my response to them is "Because I've heard both live.  You're trying to compare digital audio recorded on a smartphone yesterday with low fidelity 20, 30 and 40 year-old analog clips you didn't hear live.  How can YOU compare them?".

I am a professional musician, composer and arranger.  It is my business to hear things.  And I can hear all the tricks they are pulling in the modern activity to prompt fanboys on the internet to gush about how in tune modern corps are.  Tricks like playing unisons or open fifths while a synthesizer plays the third (and before someone says "can you provide an example?", yeah I can......ALL of them).  Tricks like covering up intonation issues with ambient choir aahs or stacked whole-note clusters in the front ensemble.  And, most notoriously, tricks like amplifying the better players while those who can't play in tune run up and down props.  No, it's not the expensive concert instruments what has made corps sound more "in-tune", it's the level of trickery and deception of the audio engineers.  All you have to do is listen to corps in victory formations.  Sure, they sound terrific, but by God they're not in any better tune than bugle lines of yesteryear.  Madison's closer in 2011 is a beautiful arrangement, but their pitch was all over the place (particularly the miked soloists).  So I'm pretty fed up with people who don't know what they're talking about trying to rewrite history to suit their own agendas.  Bugles were no harder to play than any other brass instrument.  It all came down to the competence of the performers and the instructors.  And I strongly feel there is STILL a world to be explored with bugles and their timbre (not to mention their volume, which a lot of these bugle naysayers never once experienced for themselves, and constantly speak out of complete and utter ignorance). Imagine (if you can) your favorite 21-st century production, without amplification, played on the same equipment that Madison Scouts' hornline used to bring down the house in 1995....equipment that relied upon talented performers being allowed to explore the full power of their instruments, rather than upon the full power of their sound system and speakers.  

What it comes down to is that there are hardly any active instructors or techs today who have themselves ever played a G bugle, and are inherently intimidated by them, or the prospect of trying to teach anyone how to play them.  It's not rocket surgery.  Have the trumpets, baritones, and tubas hold down their third valve.  Guess what, now you're in the key of G, now let's pretend you're playing a two-valve bugle and go from there.  A little more complex for mellophones, but any instructor worth his/her salt could figure it out with a simple Google search.  Furthermore, none of the active instructors or techs savor having to teach the baritones and contras how to read treble clef.  Again, not rocket surgery. They teach that in elementary school, for pete's sake.  For a music educator, teaching brass students to play a G bugle is no different than teaching a brass student to transpose, and if a music educator can't teach someone to transpose, then perhaps they're in the wrong field of study.  It's all a matter of convenience, and it's just more convenient for modern corps' massive team of brass instructors to roll with marching band equipment than it is to try to learn how to use the equipment that gave this entire activity its identity.

The directors, meanwhile, cite money.  "Bugles are just too expensive to maintain".  They're no more expensive to maintain than the equipment they're using today.  The ONLY difference is that they can't flip their entire hornline at the end of the tour so they can go out and buy a brand new one the next year.  Whoopty-freakin-dooooo.  That's some entitled snowflakiness, right there.  There's nothing wrong with using your line of horns until they can no longer be repaired........that used to be the golden path.  THAT used to be how you saved money.  And it could very easily be that way again.  I know for a fact there are instrument repairmen out there struggling for work at this very moment, repairmen who would love nothing more than to refurbish your entire line of bugles at a competitive discount, or perhaps even offer their services on tour with your corps.  But that's not an option for corps today, they're so spoiled, and feel like they can't function or be competitive on used equipment.....horse hockey.  Buying new horns every year is a ludicrous, excessive, and needless expense, demonstrative of how misaligned DCI's priorities have become.

Now, all I've even covered is the G bugles, which was the first button of mine that DCI pushed.  I haven't even begun to answer your question, and I have MUCH more to say on this matter......MUCH more.......but there are only 24 hours in a day, so I'll simply say, more to come.

 

Edited August 9, 2017 by Bobby L. Collins

[2muchcoffeeman]

Pass.

[ouooga]

13 minutes ago, N.E. Brigand said:

Interesting. During most of that time, amplification was allowed, and for the most part, that didn't really make for better shows. It didn't always hurt, and most of the time it probably had no effect on the overall quality one way or the other, but I think it hurt more often than it helped. I suspect a vast majority of fans would have liked BD 2005 and Cadets 2007 more if they didn't have amplified voice.

Just wanted to chime in that I fully agree on that Cadets 07 notion. Literally remove all the voices so the brass just plays loud following a 4 or 8 count rest, that show would have been dripping with GE! Add in that and move Finals out of California that year, and Cadets probably would have taken gold!

[luv4corps]

16 hours ago, cowtown said:

 

 

Go amps, did you hear that Yamaha mixer, it sounds like tubes. Blue Devils has the best sound guy doing the mix but Bloo has the best subs

 

It really is heading toward a contest of sound guys and who has the best toys.  I am a relatively new fan (2010) and I've seen the changes even in that time span.  I'm not a purist and DO enjoy a lot of the more modern shows, BUT I don't fully embrace some of the current trends:  heavy dependence on electronics, over-amplification, synth goo, too much pre-recorded material, vocals that dominate, no headgear, the demise of the traditional uniform, 

I kind of feel like I just discovered this amazing activity and it is already changing into something else!

Edited August 10, 2017 by luv4corps

[Hrothgar15]

FWIW when I first saw this topic I interpreted the question as "Was there more we could have done to stem the tide of change and letting drum corps show get to this point?" to which I would answer, "Yes: we could have listened to Scott Stewart and his vision for the activity."

Edited August 9, 2017 by Hrothgar15

[Fred Windish]

I truly believe the switch out of G bugles was a result of brass instrument manufacturers wanting to sell the greatest amount of instruments all over the world. That's a reasonable goal for a business. Just using arbitrary numbers for illustration only, on one hand we had 150 field music groups using G brass. On the other, we had 400,000 brass instrument users (individual players and field music groups). playing standard 3-valve equipment.  Why run a production line to service a relatively small segment of brass users? Better to help future customers forget there ever was an alternative to B-Flat. Just take it off the shelf.