2018 Rules proposals

[Jeff Ream]

3 minutes ago, xandandl said:

I've heard that they have medicine for that now. See your corps medical team.

oops LOL. hockey. you mean hair dryers dont work for that anymore?

[Fran Haring]

19 hours ago, glory said:

I used to work with the former editor-in-chief of the Boston Herald, which was a pretty big paper back in the day. He would tell the story of one of the paper's columnists who used to say when things were getting dull that he was going to write about drum corps because those people get upset by every little thing.

We know the people he's talking about. They might even be us.

HH

I hear ya. Like Jeff said... we tend to eat our young.

But in the case I mentioned, that publisher deserved the letter from us.  LOL.  The guy went out of his way to trash us, in a year we were struggling (by our standards, at least) to rebuild. Hey... we knew we kinda sucked, for us. Didn't need anyone else telling us that in public.

It was handled privately.  When representing our corps, we never griped in public forums like DCN.... that was an unwritten corps policy.

 

Edited January 25, 2018 by Fran Haring

[Guitar1974]

To me, the current situation in regards to rules and electronic enhancement is akin to the following:

Imagine if there was technology available that would help a pro golfer hit the ball as far as he wanted- including way farther than without the technology (amplification).  Furthermore, this technology allows the golfer to hit the ball perfect every time- right in the sweet spot (audio processing i.e.; pitch correction, sampling, reverb/chorus/etc).  This technology isn't used by all the pros, only some.  And the ones that use it all have different capacity due to resources such as money and know-how.  Also, the technology and golfer's performance is actually controlled off of the course in a clubhouse by a golf technology engineer.  As each golf tour season passes the technology gets better and better in hopes fans don't even realize it's being used.

How can you compare golfers performance relative to each other?  Would golf fans be cool with it knowing technology is propping up the golfers?  At what point does the PGA step in and regulate?

Just food for thought.

 

 

[Jeff Ream]

3 minutes ago, Guitar1974 said:

To me, the current situation in regards to rules and electronic enhancement is akin to the following:

Imagine if there was technology available that would help a pro golfer hit the ball as far as he wanted- including way farther than without the technology (amplification).  Furthermore, this technology allows the golfer to hit the ball perfect every time- right in the sweet spot (audio processing i.e.; pitch correction, sampling, reverb/chorus/etc).  This technology isn't used by all the pros, only some.  And the ones that use it all have different capacity due to resources such as money and know-how.  Also, the technology and golfer's performance is actually controlled off of the course in a clubhouse by a golf technology engineer.  As each golf tour season passes the technology gets better and better in hopes fans don't even realize it's being used.

How can you compare golfers performance relative to each other?  Would golf fans be cool with it knowing technology is propping up the golfers?  At what point does the PGA step in and regulate?

Just food for thought.

 

 

technology props up all athletes in some way...and most fans dont realize it

[Fran Haring]

3 minutes ago, Guitar1974 said:

Imagine if there was technology available that would help a pro golfer hit the ball as far as he wanted- including way farther than without the technology (amplification).

 

That technology actually exists.

It's called  "Dustin Johnson." 

[cowtown]

On 1/20/2018 at 11:46 AM, Guitar1974 said:

To me it boils down to the philosophical debate of what the activity and fans value.  Is it the  purity of an acoustic human-powered event, or an "anything goes" approach with no limits in the spirit of a Broadway show or modern pop concert?  Drum corps is difficult because valid argument can be made from either perspective.  I feel that the authenticity and coresponding entertainment value is diminished when machines and audio production folks take over because then anyone can be loud, or in tune, or whatever.  A tiny corps with 10 horns could theoretically mic up and part everyone's hair- no big deal to sound awesome with machines and sound engineers.  Like pop music- it all sounds perfect now and we all know most of them can't sing haha... 

But, to many people it makes no difference that machines are in control.  The photoshoped image is beautiful and people enjoy looking at it even though they know it is not "real".  The pop star sounds pitch-perfect and looks amazing singing really catchy tunes with huge hooks and who really cares if it is "real" or not.  

You can make good argument on either end and I am not sure there is a right answer.  My point being from the rules standpoint is that rules that allow electronics to integrate seamlessly so the audience "doesn't even notice" just allows an increase in audio manipulation, not a restriction as many feel.

 

I agree with this point of view

 

And would add, many people are not aware of how much sound is being faked by electronics already, credit to the sound folks, shame to the audience

I can’t listen to Bluecoats ballad from 2014 (Hymn of the Axiom) due to the choir patch of goo covering the brass, it cheapens and distracts from the moment. As a synth part, it’s uninspired. But there was a review from a Bluecoats alumnus from a live show that year whose wife, who worked with choirs, pointed out that is sounded like a choir. He proudly proclaimed on the board that it was because the horn line was so in tune they achieved a purity of tone similar to a choir. He was oblivious to what his wife picked up on, fake sound support, faked brass tone, a musical cheat. I have a similar issue with Bluecoats 2013 which would be one of the best musical books but it’s ruined by a synth playing a backing track on several solos and runs, besides the horribly grating keyboard patch that sounds like a Keytar, it’s slightly off time and over rides their moments. This sort of sound reinforcement was pretty much ignored by Mr. Professional Bluecoats Sound Designer

 

Otherwise, Glory is doing a good job, let me know if you folks need a rant

I don’t understand the idea of slash and burn drum corps, not supporting it at all or shutting up about everything. Currently, DCP is one of the few places where fans have any voice so I rant  

[Jeff Ream]

43 minutes ago, cowtown said:

I agree with this point of view

 

And would add, many people are not aware of how much sound is being faked by electronics already, credit to the sound folks, shame to the audience

I can’t listen to Bluecoats ballad from 2014 (Hymn of the Axiom) due to the choir patch of goo covering the brass, it cheapens and distracts from the moment. As a synth part, it’s uninspired. But there was a review from a Bluecoats alumnus from a live show that year whose wife, who worked with choirs, pointed out that is sounded like a choir. He proudly proclaimed on the board that it was because the horn line was so in tune they achieved a purity of tone similar to a choir. He was oblivious to what his wife picked up on, fake sound support, faked brass tone, a musical cheat. I have a similar issue with Bluecoats 2013 which would be one of the best musical books but it’s ruined by a synth playing a backing track on several solos and runs, besides the horribly grating keyboard patch that sounds like a Keytar, it’s slightly off time and over rides their moments. This sort of sound reinforcement was pretty much ignored by Mr. Professional Bluecoats Sound Designer

 

Otherwise, Glory is doing a good job, let me know if you folks need a rant

I don’t understand the idea of slash and burn drum corps, not supporting it at all or shutting up about everything. Currently, DCP is one of the few places where fans have any voice so I rant  

i've never said shut up. i've just said they dont care what is said here. despite their claims of hating DCP, they look. When i'm told of something they "heard abut on DCP", i look it up and see the quote is verbatim, i know they read.

[Guitar1974]

41 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

technology props up all athletes in some way...and most fans dont realize it

True, to a point.  The tools of the games evolve and improve (todays super light carbon hockey sticks that allow a beer leaguer like me to fire over the glass from the blue line haha) and certainly the training technology is staggering compared to the past, but the essence of human powered performance and achievement hasn't changed.  Adding electronic enhancement and the ability of technology to actually "perform" is where the comparison differs.  

Would golf fans protest machine powered shots?  Would hockey fans protest jet propelled skates?  Of course they would because it makes the experience faux.  

I am blown away by the talent and level of execution showcased by today's corps.  It is incredible.  But, the extra smoke and mirrors from all the sound engineering puts a fake gloss on it- in my opinion.  

Again, I feel the conversation from the designers about wanting to make it more organic and seamless actually worsens the situation and makes it a drastically uneven competitive environment.  Good discussion, though.  There are certainly good arguments in favor.  

[glory]

We have to be careful with "tools." The playing field isn't level (and never was) with a lot more than amps, mics and mixing boards. We know that some corps get new horns every year while others subsist on hand-me-downs. Some get prime staff and prime talent. BD and SCV can afford to run a corps year to year. Everyone else - everyone else! - struggles every day.

The tools have never been distributed equally. That said, I am in total agreement that every tool should be evaluated by the judges on an equal basis. That hasn't been happening. Relying disproportionately on a mic'ed subset of the hornline can't count the same as a hornline in full. Doesn't make sense.

HH

[MikeD]

11 hours ago, garfield said:

A very close friend of mine who judges USBands told me the exact same story.  Hop and Gino stood up for him, but the band directors were indignant that their scores were effected by sideline goo.  His answer was the same "If I can't hear the band, I can't judge the band!"

Judging ensemble balance is the sound of the ensemble that makes it to the judge in the box. Period. If one section overpowers the rest, the ensemble balance should suffer in the judge's evaluation. That is how I have always judged, regardless of whether or not the band used electronics. I have used electronics and amps with the band I teach for 15 years. We try and get the bland and balance right, but sometimes we just mess up....we as staff cringe when it is not good....and we expect the judge to comment and score us appropriately. It usually happens that way. When we get it right...the same...we expect good comments and scores in that area. 

Now, a sheet is full of criteria to be judged. How much one area of weakness will impact a score is open to interpretation by the judge. I see comments here about bad electronic balance and its impact not being seen in scores....maybe it is...but just maybe the amount one area reflects in the score is not as overwhelming as those who complain want it to be.