Jump to content

Time to Say Goodbye, after 15 years


Recommended Posts

22 hours ago, MikeD said:

As has always been the case, corps believe they should remain current with the activity. Corps added contras, mellos, multi drums, marching timpani and later mallets, 2- and then 3-valve horns, etc.....and just about everybody followed suit. 

Considering less than 50 corps remain from the hundreds upon hundreds we used to have, it is hard to claim "just about everybody followed suit".

Quote

Would a corps sound inferior today without electronics? IMO yes. I know from the band I taught that when we did not micc the mallets in early rehearsals or when there was no source to plug into (practice field),  the sound suffered greatly. 

Oh, the irony. 

You are the one always saying that judges can only judge what is presented, not what is absent.  Now you let the truth slip out.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/6/2019 at 2:34 PM, cixelsyd said:

The idea of refusing to use your arms (i.e. soccer) lost its cultural relevance back when our species learned to walk on two legs.  Yet there are more than 50 soccer teams in my town.

 

22 hours ago, garfield said:

I have no idea what point you're arguing, but I LOVE this reference.  LOL

The myth that "cultural relevance" is essential.

Drum corps did not become popular because it was culturally relevant - exactly the opposite.  The military, veterans organizations and civic groups had already moved on to full-fledged bands.  Drum corps became popular in the 1920s and 1930s while performing right alongside such marching bands, because people were amazed by the effects that could be produced with more limited, culturally irrelevant instrumentation.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Fran Haring said:

Exactly. You and the Raricks go way back.

Heck... I remember seeing Tom as a kid on stage at the Forum, playing a snare duet with his dad.

we ran around City island watching our dads rehearse

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, cixelsyd said:

Considering less than 50 corps remain from the hundreds upon hundreds we used to have, it is hard to claim "just about everybody followed suit".

Oh, the irony. 

You are the one always saying that judges can only judge what is presented, not what is absent.  Now you let the truth slip out.

Right, judges evaluate what is presented. For example, if a mallet section is not micced and the overall sound suffers as compared to one that is amplified, then the sound the judge hears will drive what the judge hears and evaluates. My comparison is assuming both are presenting as best they can. If a micced section is poorly balanced, then it should suffer, of course. IMO a properly amplified mallet section permits better selection of mallets and provides the players with the ability to play with better technique, resulting in a better sound. So yes, the judges' job is to evaluate what is presented. 

Everybody followed suit along the way. Corps that folded for whatever reason are besides the point.Corps have come and gone forever. That is irrelevant to this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MikeD said:

Right, judges evaluate what is presented. For example, if a mallet section is not micced and the overall sound suffers as compared to one that is amplified, then the sound the judge hears will drive what the judge hears and evaluates. My comparison is assuming both are presenting as best they can. If a micced section is poorly balanced, then it should suffer, of course. IMO a properly amplified mallet section permits better selection of mallets and provides the players with the ability to play with better technique, resulting in a better sound. So yes, the judges' job is to evaluate what is presented. 

Everybody followed suit along the way. Corps that folded for whatever reason are besides the point.Corps have come and gone forever. That is irrelevant to this.

The pure sound of an acoustic mallet section is never inferior to the plastic sound of an electronically amplified / microphoned sound.  Acoustic sound does not “suffer.”  Any judge who thinks otherwise is just following the herd that’s created this tinny sound that seems like it’s coming out of a tunnel. It’s horrible. 

Edited by HockeyDad
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, HockeyDad said:

The pure sound of an acoustic mallet section is never inferior to the plastic sound of an electronically amplified / microphoned sound.  Acoustic sound does not “suffer.”  Any judge who thinks otherwise is just following the herd that’s created this tinny sound that seems like it’s coming out of a tunnel. It’s horrible. 

I've heard excellent mic'ing and horrid mic'ing. If we are talking about terrible mic'ing jobs, yes, it sounds somewhat tinny and generally pretty awful. If it's done well, it supports the more complex parts that the front ensembles are playing now. For instance, 2010 PR was one of the tastiest front ensembles I've ever heard. But without amplification (granted it was little amplification compared to what is being done now respectively and may not even have been intended to amplify the pit considering the mic placement) I wouldn't have been able to hear them at all against the full ensemble. And their amplification didn't sound like it was coming out of a tunnel (interesting word choice however considering the "pre-show,") in my opinion. I thought they had a gorgeous full sound. 

Yes, corps are moving towards more amplification, change in instrumentation and electronics. That doesn't make it bad.......It just makes it bad to some people. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Weaklefthand4ever said:

I've heard excellent mic'ing and horrid mic'ing. If we are talking about terrible mic'ing jobs, yes, it sounds somewhat tinny and generally pretty awful. If it's done well, it supports the more complex parts that the front ensembles are playing now.

I agree. Bad = tinny, overmodulated, harsh, whatever. Good = nice sound, an enhancement rather than a distraction.

The band Mike Davis worked with in NJ a few years ago.... saw them a few times at the USBands shows and they were, IMO, a good example of how to use electronics, especially for a smaller group. Never really heard any tinny, obtrusive, or "artificial" sounds from them. Especially the year or two when they used a cello in their show. 1) The young lady playing the cello was terrific, and 2) the miking was spot on.

Edited by Fran Haring
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

my big problem is that A&E fundamentally changes the way we assess balance in an ensemble.  

when it was acoustic, you could say that certain sections or players within sections were out of balance with the ensemble as a whole.  now, balance problems can be because disconnected or malfunctioning wires/mic placement/amp placement/soundboard incompetence, etc.  where is the differentiated language in the rubric that addresses how these things impact scores?  it shouldn't just be the same as it was back when it was acoustic only. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lance said:

my big problem is that A&E fundamentally changes the way we assess balance in an ensemble.  

when it was acoustic, you could say that certain sections or players within sections were out of balance with the ensemble as a whole.  now, balance problems can be because disconnected or malfunctioning wires/mic placement/amp placement/soundboard incompetence, etc.  where is the differentiated language in the rubric that addresses how these things impact scores?  it shouldn't just be the same as it was back when it was acoustic only. 

So true!  And we obviously know of their willingness to supplement weak sections, and cross sections from side-1 to side-2, "phase" impacts, and otherwise interfere with the acoustic balance we old pharts desire...

Oh, never mind.  I'll get off your yard.  Today's kids and fans have "grown up" with electronified, whiz-bang audio tricks, and thundering bass.  "Acoustic", you say?  "What's that?", they say.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...