Lance Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet. Call it Tiddlywillikers. It's awesome no matter what. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 32 minutes ago, Lance said: What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet. Call it Tiddlywillikers. It's awesome no matter what. here's maybe what you don't get from the older generations POV ( and I am not saying they are right, I just get it) band and drum corps didn't have the inner connectedness it has today. both eyed each other derisively. in corps, it was a point of pirde to be better than band. band directors hated drum corps...."they aren't real musicians". It was until the 70's when competitive marching band started taking off that you saw the gap between the two start to shrink to where it is today. So to the older generations POV, band is a dirty word 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said: here's maybe what you don't get from the older generations POV ( and I am not saying they are right, I just get it) band and drum corps didn't have the inner connectedness it has today. both eyed each other derisively. in corps, it was a point of pirde to be better than band. band directors hated drum corps...."they aren't real musicians". It was until the 70's when competitive marching band started taking off that you saw the gap between the two start to shrink to where it is today. So to the older generations POV, band is a dirty word And for the horn players late 70s the valves started going upright. Before you could tell at a glance if a band or corps instrument or group. And nobody looked that close to see how many (upright) valves. So to the average person... band Edited March 8, 2019 by JimF-LowBari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said: here's maybe what you don't get from the older generations POV ( and I am not saying they are right, I just get it) band and drum corps didn't have the inner connectedness it has today. both eyed each other derisively. in corps, it was a point of pirde to be better than band. band directors hated drum corps...."they aren't real musicians". It was until the 70's when competitive marching band started taking off that you saw the gap between the two start to shrink to where it is today. So to the older generations POV, band is a dirty word 4 Yet " WE" have no one to blame but ourselves. Drum Corps people saturated the band world decades ago. Mostly because there was money to be had there. The argument could also be made ( and has ) that drum corps people weren't acceptable in the band world. Many band people rejected the DCI format and told their students marching in DCI was ruining real musicians. Now all of that has changed, design, competition., style, money, etc etc and why...Drum corps people. There's the good or bad of that, whatever one wants to make of it. Edited March 8, 2019 by GUARDLING 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 12 minutes ago, GUARDLING said: Yet " WE" have no one to blame but ourselves. Drum Corps people saturated the band world decades ago. Mostly because there was money to be had there. The argument could also be made ( and has ) that drum corps people weren't acceptable in the band world. Many band people rejected the DCI format and told their students marching in DCI was ruining real musicians. Now all of that has changed, design, competition., style, money, etc etc and why...Drum corps people. There's the good or bad of that, whatever one wants to make of it. Exactly so. Drum corps was a victim of its own success, so to speak. The band world became flooded with corps members who decided to major in music education in college. Corps-style band shows became far more prevalent through the 70's and beyond, as these folks hired corps-experienced staff people as designers and instructors. Judging associations saw drum corps declining, and they turned their focus to bands. In my area, for example, National Judges ran TOB early on and Metro All American where I judged started EMBA in the late 70's. It kept the judges working while local-style drum corps was declining. There were always many band kids who marched corps, at least in the NJ suburbs. The GSC corps I marched with in 68 and 69 had probably 45-50% of the 25+ horns/10+ drummers come from their local HS bands. My HS director hated drum corps, but he made us a deal. We would attend all fall HS band activities, and we could march with the corps for spring parades when there was a conflict. He also hated marching band, as he was a classical oboe player by background. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 2 hours ago, KVG_DC said: Also, I'm not very motivated to watch this thing. But based on commentary here, I'm wondering what the time code is where they reveal that the real Drum Corps designers of yore were actually taken on a plane to a secret government hangar and never seen again as they were replaced by DCI's "corporate executives." Also where's the part that argues that G-bulges couldn't possibly be melted by jet fuel? More specific description of the elusive beast is "DCI business-trained executives". I think I've seen, maybe, one of those in 45 years of participation. Like our friend here, the cappybara is more-frequently sighted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 2 hours ago, cixelsyd said: Attitudes, I cannot vouch for. But I do know this much. From the inception of organized drill competition among VFW and AL corps, there were parallel/separate divisions for "drum corps" and "marching band". They were two different things 100 years ago, and they still are today. Maybe they both evolved from some commonalities, and maybe they will converge to one common activity in the future... but so far, in the era of organized drill competition, for competitive purposes, they have generally been considered as two distinct genres. And you just described the illusion, or delusion, they told/tell themselves which has always existed. Not that the parallel/seperate divisions existed based on instrumentation (ww and tpts in one, no ww and bugles in the other). But from their inception, they have denied and still deny that corps were and still are in fact a group of people playing instruments (band) who kept/keep in step together based on time (marching). Thus corps were/are in fact marching bands. The real seperation was/is just merely a sub category of instrumentation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cixelsyd Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 6 minutes ago, Stu said: And you just described the illusion, or delusion, they told/tell themselves which has always existed. Not that the parallel/seperate divisions existed based on instrumentation (ww and tpts in one, no ww and bugles in the other). But from their inception, they have denied and still deny that corps were and still are in fact a group of people playing instruments (band) who kept/keep in step together based on time (marching). Thus corps were/are in fact marching bands. The real seperation was/is just merely a sub category of instrumentation. No idea what you are talking about. Who back at inception (1919) denied that the separate classifications were based on instrumentation? By the way, you are incorrect about the instrumentation. At inception, drum corps were not required to have bugles. Corps using fifes, bagpipes, bugles, or any combination of those, competed against each other. Bugles were the most popular and competitively successful choice, though, to the point where the alternatives faded into near obscurity in comparison. Still, the occasional fife & drum corps competed among drum & bugle corps as late as the 1960s. Yikes - woodwinds in drum corps! 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigW Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 4 hours ago, KVG_DC said: Also, I'm not very motivated to watch this thing. But based on commentary here, I'm wondering what the time code is where they reveal that the real Drum Corps designers of yore were actually taken on a plane to a secret government hangar and never seen again as they were replaced by DCI's "corporate executives." Also where's the part that argues that G-bulges couldn't possibly be melted by jet fuel? Dunno about the jet fuel or the melting point... but the chrome on my Ultratone is mighty thick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigW Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 23 minutes ago, cixelsyd said: No idea what you are talking about. Who back at inception (1919) denied that the separate classifications were based on instrumentation? By the way, you are incorrect about the instrumentation. At inception, drum corps were not required to have bugles. Corps using fifes, bagpipes, bugles, or any combination of those, competed against each other. Bugles were the most popular and competitively successful choice, though, to the point where the alternatives faded into near obscurity in comparison. Still, the occasional fife & drum corps competed among drum & bugle corps as late as the 1960s. Yikes - woodwinds in drum corps! The reason likely being that fifes and bagpipes require a lot more basic training and development to get anything like a decent sounding result out of them than even a "more advanced" G-D bugle. 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.