What would you think if...

[JimF-LowBari]

3 minutes ago, cixelsyd said:

 

Time travel is not required, as we still have alumni corps who demonstrate the point, even with performance levels that do not match what they were at peak competitive form BITD.  Drum corps of the 1970s and earlier format could be heard in striking clarity.  They demonstrated that brass and percussion were the instruments of choice to achieve that clarity in the field setting.

Speaking as one who discovered and competed in the 70s there was a lot of amazement that corps could play such beautiful and varied music given the limitation of the equipment. People were impressed what could be done using the members own talents. 

Not going to down what members are doing today but seems like lot of folks here want to reach for that easy button.

[cfirwin3]

4 minutes ago, garfield said:

The same ones you are, of course.

Is there "simultaneous demand" credit given to individual performers for moving props while carrying their instrument?

Just wondering...

 

Is "simultaneous demand" in the sheets?

Besides, I have bothered to compare enough shows head to head, in their entirety, in search of 'simultaneous demand' (among all other demands) to be convinced that there is only a discrepancy in favor of the present over the past.

[E3D]

13 hours ago, Glenn426 said:

This is actually a very fair point..

We are actually seeing in the Music captions this year who is utilizing the technology to their benefit and those who are lacking..

Bluecoats has had the fortune to make these investments in the technology little by little over the last 4 years since 2016 when Aaron Beck came on board..

Imagine you're a finalist corps looking to make a push towards a championship and you haven't made these investments over time, you try your best with the old formula but you are getting slammed over the head in the music captions with no relief in sight other than to make a drastic investment into designing with Electronics in mind from the jump... 

Meanwhile those corps who have pioneered this area and are teaching others to get on board, are doing so to protect their investment and not have a sudden rule change banning such extensive use of electronics..

It was interesting watching the DCI videos on their YT channel around the 2018 DCI meetings.. Cavaliers actually went into those meetings trying to limit the use of electronics in DCI, but Bluecoats surprisingly spilled all of their secrets with that Aaron Beck presentation and let all of DCI corps know how they where doing, what they where using equipment wise to achieve it... Mighty nice of Bluecoats to do that, where it not to protect their investment and maintain their advantage in the area.. 

 

I doubt that bold part. They did not give up everything. 

[MarimbaManiac]

12 minutes ago, cixelsyd said:

I have several quibbles with your characterizations, but the bolded one deserves particular focus.

Time travel is not required, as we still have alumni corps who demonstrate the point, even with performance levels that do not match what they were at peak competitive form BITD.  Drum corps of the 1970s and earlier format could be heard in striking clarity.  They demonstrated that brass and percussion were the instruments of choice to achieve that clarity in the field setting.

...at yet that did nothing to address the issues with performing in variable venues, and the different acoustical issues that accompany specific performance environments. Performances could be radically different night to night depending on if the venue was enclosed, or had concrete stands, or a close wall, etc. 

12 minutes ago, cixelsyd said:

Totally opposite to what you suggest, I find modern drum corps has become increasingly muddled and unbalanced.  Pit percussion added inherent challenges to ensemble balance and timing.  Electronics add another 100 issues, and still counting.  As if it were not already bad enough, now corps are becoming increasingly obsessed with micing themselves and mixing that in with the acoustic sound.  Oh, I am sure someone will provide some convoluted attempt at explaining why that could ever possibly be a good thing.  But it is only really a good thing for the companies selling the mics, mixers and speakers.

I would argue that your opinions are being shaped by your own biases. The balance achieved today is absolutely stellar and light years ahead of what would be possible decades ago. Being able to balance the frequency spectrum to hear all parts of the ensemble, in every venue is a herculean feat. 

12 minutes ago, cixelsyd said:

I am not convinced that anyone knows precisely how these sounds "mix". 

I think the people with advanced degrees in sound production, and decades working with live sound would disagree with you there. 

 

3 minutes ago, cixelsyd said:

  It is totally insane to take a drumline that devotes every ounce of their energy to playing in tight uniformity, and allow their sound to be picked up on scattered field microphones to be mixed in and pumped out of speakers at scattered locations with varying latency.  Soon, the only place to go hear a clean drumline will be where the field judge stands - behind the speakers.  

 

You realize it's possible to filter the signals to remove unwanted frequencies right? I'm sure each of the field mics has a noise gate and parametric EQ that's allowing through only what's intended.  

Edited August 7, 2019 by MarimbaManiac

[Cappybara]

1 minute ago, MarimbaManiac said:

...at yet that did nothing to address the issues with performing in variable venues, and the different acoustical issues that accompany specific performance environments. Performances could be radically different night to night depending on if the venue was enclosed, or had concrete stands, or a close wall, etc. 

I would argue that your opinions are being shaped by your own biases. The balance achieved today is absolutely stellar and light years ahead of what would be possible decades ago. Being able to balance the frequency spectrum to hear all parts of the ensemble, in every venue is a herculean feat. 

I think the people with advanced degrees in sound production, and decades working with live sound would disagree with you there. 

Huh? Are you suggesting your opinions aren't being shaped by your biases? What year were you programmed into existence?

[cfirwin3]

Just now, JimF-LowBari said:

Speaking as one who discovered and competed in the 70s there was a lot of amazement that corps could play such beautiful and varied music given the limitation of the equipment. People were impressed what could be done using the members own talents. 

Not going to down what members are doing today but seems like lot of folks here want to reach for that easy button.

Ugh.

Folks here want to define an 'easy button' where there is none.

A few minutes spent in an ensemble rehearsal today apart from the show gear would settle that once and for all for most objective viewers.

[JimF-LowBari]

2 minutes ago, cfirwin3 said:

Ugh.

Folks here want to define an 'easy button' where there is none.

A few minutes spent in an ensemble rehearsal today apart from the show gear would settle that once and for all for most objective viewers.

But if all that work in ensemble doesn’t do the trick on the field.... we got blend experts for that.... IOW ensemble rehearsal is one thing but trying to duplicate that on an open field is another

Edited August 7, 2019 by JimF-LowBari

[jwillis35]

13 hours ago, karuna said:

But no one said anything about trying to duplicate an entire 80 person line with 30.  That's a straw man argument.

It's more about arranging parts so that some super technical stuff is being covered by your really strong players and the rest are 'supporting' their parts in a clever way.  It's not hard to do and you WONT be able tell unless you're literally in the bell of every player in the line. 

</rant>

This was happening back in the 70s and 80s. Way before mics and amps. Drum corps have always given some of the more beefy parts to the better players and have watered down their books for the rest, especially as the season comes to a close. Sometimes it was done to meet the needs of the visual, and sometimes they simply had to water-down the book for the sake of cleanliness. That issue is nothing new. It's still one of the ways to clean a show. The judges know this, and they know what to listen for and how to score it. There is no law that states that unless every member of your brass line can play the hardest "licks" then you must not perform that passage at all.  It's not cheating. It's called being smart. Showcase was you can, as well as you can, and let the judges make the call. 

 

[E3D]

12 hours ago, Eleran said:

That's simply not true at all.  Trumpets (bugles) were originally outdoor instruments, for crying outloud!

Giving an ensemble 76+ brass was the answer to having them play outside on a football field.   With all that you are advocating, there is no need for more than 1 brass player per part.  I guess the other 60 spots can go to colorguard and dancers then, and just let the 16 or so brass players sit on the sideline with microphones.

They will never get this. 

[MarimbaManiac]

3 minutes ago, Cappybara said:

Huh? Are you suggesting your opinions aren't being shaped by your biases? What year were you programmed into existence?

My opinions aren't really opinions, more objective observations based on my extensive and continued work with live sound reinforcement, music technology, electroacoustic composition and acoustics/psychoacoustics/sound propagation (and several advanced degrees in these fields). 

This why when people say things like "easy button" and "balance was better in the 70s!" it's a bit triggering...because it's scientifically, demonstrably, objectively, false.