ouooga Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 Side note: if you REALLY want to take this approach further, it should be story/theme/elements/whatever the heck is guiding your show other than visual/music, and then portray that story/theme/whatever through visual and music. Same approach that goes into interpretive dance. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 (edited) 38 minutes ago, ouooga said: There is a middle ground that can be accomplished that still emphasizes visual as the starting point. But why should it always emphasize the visual as the starting point? Visual first is not middle ground, that is master slave. Why not treat visual and music equally when constructing show design? That is mutual respect. Edited September 7, 2017 by Stu 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 (edited) 32 minutes ago, ouooga said: This is a personal opinion obviously; overall I disagree. You mean what we observed from the stands at Lucas were movie-shorts? Edited September 7, 2017 by Stu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 5 minutes ago, ouooga said: Side note: if you REALLY want to take this approach further, it should be story/theme/elements/whatever the heck is guiding your show other than visual/music, and then portray that story/theme/whatever through visual and music. Same approach that goes into interpretive dance. In most interpretive dance the musical arranging is not butchered to fit the movement of the dance. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, ouooga said: But I will say, your approach to visual-first music-second = chord, run, impact, etc. is spot on, and it's just lazy design. I think it is a product of visual commanding and dictating 'everything' in modern DCI show design where the music arranger is at the mercy of the movement design team. But if musical laziness is the case, there have been a lot of Bronze, Silver, and Gold medals given out to that 'laziness' over the past ten years or so. Edited September 7, 2017 by Stu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Dixon Posted September 7, 2017 Author Share Posted September 7, 2017 3 hours ago, Stu said: I enjoyed the doc; but DCI is not movie-film and it's show design should not be considered as such. That is what I am getting at. No one is saying it is stu glad you enjoyed the doc 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 12 minutes ago, George Dixon said: No one is saying it is stu glad you enjoyed the doc You made the fillowing connection in your opening post: "SImilar to the "Drill/VIsual <<>> Music" relationship in drum corps design/arrangement/composition - film music is developed alongside the visual element and hopefully together the sum is greater than the parts ... This documentary discusses the evolution of "scoring" modern movies & includes many prominent film composition... - but mostly I'm interested in how you feel this relates to the visual/music design of modern drum corps" I just maintain that treating DCI show design like film music is a major problem in DCI because DCI is not a movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouooga Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 3 hours ago, Stu said: I think it is a product of visual commanding and dictating 'everything' in modern DCI show design where the music arranger is at the mercy of the movement design team. But if musical laziness is the case, there have been a lot of Bronze, Silver, and Gold medals given out to that 'laziness' over the past ten years or so. The bold part, you are 100% right, and this does trouble me. This strategy wins, but it's safe, and safe doesn't instigate interesting paradigm shifts, nor does it make shows that are accessible to a wider audience. 3 hours ago, Stu said: You mean what we observed from the stands at Lucas were movie-shorts? No, that's a jump in the logic. You said "Drum corps is not, and should not be considered as, film." I disagree, as is my right and opinion. I evaluate film music the same way I evaluate drum corps; did the audio complement the visual, and vice versa? Nowhere in this does it imply that drum corps shows are film shorts, though I would say they are short stories* told through a combination of audio and visual. The same could be said for Fantasia. *Story is a lose term. I don't mean it as beginning - middle - end; characters and plot development; etc. I mean it as using the visual and audio to take the audience on an emotional ride. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Dixon Posted September 7, 2017 Author Share Posted September 7, 2017 I used the word similar. As in somewhat like but not the same. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, ouooga said: No, that's a jump in the logic. You said "Drum corps is not, and should not be considered as, film." I disagree, as is my right and opinion. I evaluate film music the same way I evaluate drum corps; did the audio complement the visual, and vice versa? Nowhere in this does it imply that drum corps shows are film shorts, though I would say they are short stories* told through a combination of audio and visual. The same could be said for Fantasia. *Story is a lose term. I don't mean it as beginning - middle - end; characters and plot development; etc. I mean it as using the visual and audio to take the audience on an emotional ride. But..... the problem is that the vehicle of drum corps is far, far, far from being anywhere close to film; it is more akin to Broadway or Rock stage productions than anything else. And in stage productions the music is equally married with equal respect to the visual. You never witnessed the music of Andrew Loyd Weber's Phantom butchered and chopped on Broadway in order to support the almighty visual design on stage; and in the live productions of Pink Floyd's The Wall the music was respected right along side the visual representations on stage. You even mentioned interpretive dance, and even there the music is not butchered to the movement. But in the world of film today, the music on screen is merely there in order to enhance and support to the almighty visual; in fact it is best when the film audience is not aware of the music but emotionally moved by the sound in order to engage with the visual Moreover, if the music was pulled directly off most movies and put directly on a CD it would sound ridiculously disjunctive; the CD soundtracks are typically rearranged and rerecorded to actually make musical since.. So since DCI is closer to Stage productions than film, why does the DCI design have to start with, and be solely driven by, the visual which in turn many times forces the non-cohesive phrases, chopped melodic content, strange impacts and runs? (again, those disjunctive aspects are not laziness on the arranger's part, that is just the way film music is actually written) Edited September 8, 2017 by Stu 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.