Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Glenn426 said:

Doesn't it seem so short-sighted to look back at that time now? If those people had it their way, DCI would have failed. Growth and understanding happens with time. The vibration of a reed instead of the lips will not change the activity. The arrangers are not going to suddenly lose their taste for and want for that signature brass sonority.

What will most likely happen is there will be a couple of WW soloist in the first year, and then the beginning of the ballad will be a WW moment. Outside of that most else will stay the same... 

This is the generic argument used to usher in all recent changes. “It will mostly stay the same.”  Which is nonsense. 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Glenn426 said:

Having played both, A G 5/4 Contrabass in 2000 BAC and the similar model 5/4 Bb Contra with BAC in 2002

The G Bugle was so hard to center, It was easier to play louder without distortion but that was the only advantage it had over the Bb horn. Tuning, Range everything was easier to master on the Bb horn. Not to mention having to read Treble clef music and having to hand write valve combinations on all my music... 

For the kids having learned to play on Bb Horns their entire career,  to have to pick up a G bugle for the first time at an audition camp in November and trying to learn a new instrument, instead of hitting the ground running. The Bb is superior

Ok I understand where you’re coming from now and no problem. Thought you might have been one of those people who said horns BITD sounded bad because of key and ignored how the horns were constructed. But seeing the details now can tell was mistaken.

I played trombone in mb so my big learning curve was fingerings and not the key. In fact I never played a valve Bb instrument so no idea what it’s like to deal with different keys that way.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Jeff Ream said:

Just like amps. Get one piece in, let it settle, then take the next step. 

Ant there is the aspect of size of MM on the field having a negative affect on the visual design.  Look at the larger BOA band show designs.  There are so many kids on the field that it looks like mass confusion.  Especially the Texas mega schools, where they think bigger is better, more is more and money is obviously not a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, EricS said:

Ant there is the aspect of size of MM on the field having a negative affect on the visual design.  Look at the larger BOA band show designs.  There are so many kids on the field that it looks like mass confusion.  Especially the Texas mega schools, where they think bigger is better, more is more and money is obviously not a problem.

I don’t think 2019 Ronald Regan H.S. band looked like mass confusion.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone know if George Hopkins (or anyone else) actually submitted a formal woodwind proposal in the past, or was it just talked about?  

Is the the first time that a woodwind proposal got formally submitted?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, N.E. Brigand said:

Well, I've said here for ten years that I have no problems with adding woodwinds as long as they're not allowed to be amplified, and I stand by that.

So bring on the bagpipes.

Bagpipes are definitely, definitely, without hesitation my line in the sand.

The first corps that uses them becomes my hotdog corps and I don't care who they are.

Until someone figures out articulation in a wind bag, there are four great pieces of kindling in every bagpipe "instrument".

Accordions however, I can get behind.  Crown blending 10 marching accordions to that brass line would be glorious!

/kidding

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Jeff Ream said:

Yes. You need a motivation to need to increase membership size. 

And I would suggest that just allowing WW is not a money-maker; probably the opposite except for the motivated team that wants to use the "cuts" to start a new unit.

But, adding a busload is a definite revenue generator!  (And a false pretense of those who don't understand income statements or balance sheets.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, EricS said:

Ant there is the aspect of size of MM on the field having a negative affect on the visual design.  Look at the larger BOA band show designs.  There are so many kids on the field that it looks like mass confusion.  Especially the Texas mega schools, where they think bigger is better, more is more and money is obviously not a problem.

It's probably bordering on "fat shaming" to discuss the size of the MMs on the field.  But there is a motivation to add MMs as they decrease in size simply because designers can fit more of them in between yard lines.  But to say that MM size would have a negative effect on visual design is going to get you in trouble, I think.

 

/sarcasm and I'm reminded of the old joke "...I don't have to outrun the bear, I only have to outrun you".

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, N.E. Brigand said:

The reason I ask is that per the rules that were posted, these corps can vote. But which corps are they? There were Open Class Finalist Corps last year, but none were called "Open Class Grand Finalists", as far as I know. Is this just a weird random error, or does it mean that only some (or none) of the O.C. finalist corps can vote?

Oh, I see that now.  It is where they define who votes in the instructor caucus, to decide which proposals move on to the directors for final voting.

At one point in time, the finals event for divisions II, III and international were branded "Grand Finals".  That language went away when II and III were combined into "open class".  Apparently, no one ever thought to fix that.

Far more troubling, though, is the language regarding the final vote.  Intent is for that vote to be taken by the directors of the 22 DCI member corps.  But that is not what the document says.  It says the "Board of Directors" takes that vote. 

Once upon a time, "DCI Board of Directors" = the member corps directors.  That is no longer true.  The DCI Board of Directors now consists of three "at-large" people, three corps-affiliated people who are not corps directors, and three corps directors.  Per DCI.org, they are:

Kathy Black, Chair
Jim Tabuchi, Vice-Chair

James Doyle
David Glasgow
Fran Kick
Chris Komnick
John Masterson
Jonathan Powell

(one BoD position vacant)

According to that language, the other 19 member corps directors would not get to vote on rule change proposals. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, cixelsyd said:

Oh, I see that now.  It is where they define who votes in the instructor caucus, to decide which proposals move on to the directors for final voting.

At one point in time, the finals event for divisions II, III and international were branded "Grand Finals".  That language went away when II and III were combined into "open class".  Apparently, no one ever thought to fix that.

Far more troubling, though, is the language regarding the final vote.  Intent is for that vote to be taken by the directors of the 22 DCI member corps.  But that is not what the document says.  It says the "Board of Directors" takes that vote. 

Once upon a time, "DCI Board of Directors" = the member corps directors.  That is no longer true.  The DCI Board of Directors now consists of three "at-large" people, three corps-affiliated people who are not corps directors, and three corps directors.  Per DCI.org, they are:

Kathy Black, Chair
Jim Tabuchi, Vice-Chair

James Doyle
David Glasgow
Fran Kick
Chris Komnick
John Masterson
Jonathan Powell

(one BoD position vacant)

According to that language, the other 19 member corps directors would not get to vote on rule change proposals. 

The Other-19 have elected these BoD reps to vote in the interest of the entire activity, not just to benefit the affiliated corps or directors.  They've voted on this structure so, presumably, the "Other-19" are fine with who is voting on the issue.

And thanks for the clarification of "Grand".  That one has me stumped; why leave the verbiage after so many years of simply "Open Class Champion"?

 

Edited by garfield

Share this post


Link to post
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.