jthomas666 Posted May 17, 2020 Share Posted May 17, 2020 11 hours ago, greg_orangecounty said: Don't get me started. Next to props pits are second least return on investment. Wouldn't mind them so much but there are so MANY of them! Why? Wasn't one of the arguments for amplification that it would allow corps to reduce the size of the pits? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supersop Posted May 17, 2020 Share Posted May 17, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, jthomas666 said: Wasn't one of the arguments for amplification that it would allow corps to reduce the size of the pits? No one officially touted reducing pit size in the original proposal of the rule. The reasons given were to use proper technique and mallets and allow for the true timbre of the instruments to be used. It would also allow the performers to play at realistic mallet heights and eliminate overplaying in order to balance the ensemble. The problem with the original pitch was that those who voted for it were under the impression that the mixing board would be in a SET position, merely an amplification for overall sound. Not constantly manipulated, digitized, remixed, etc etc etc. Edited May 17, 2020 by supersop because English.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg_orangecounty Posted May 17, 2020 Share Posted May 17, 2020 28 minutes ago, supersop said: No one officially touted reducing pit size in the original proposal of the rule. The reasons given were to use proper technique and mallets and allow for the true timbre of the instruments to be used. It would also allow the performers to play at realistic mallet heights and eliminate overplaying in order to balance the ensemble. The problem with the original pitch was that those who voted for it were under the impression that the mixing board would be in a SET position, merely an amplification for overall sound. Not constantly manipulated, digitized, remixed, etc etc etc. I have the perfect solution if they don't want to limit Pit size to under 10,000. Move them to the back side line. Problem solved. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supersop Posted May 17, 2020 Share Posted May 17, 2020 (edited) 3 minutes ago, greg_orangecounty said: I have the perfect solution if they don't want to limit Pit size to under 10,000. Move them to the back side line. Problem solved. Honestly, I'm shocked this hasn't happened yet. YES, you want them up front for the visual aspect of their playing. BUT, from an ensemble standpoint ... and balancing the amps ... put them in the back. It would eliminate timing issues as well. Put a met in the pits ear (preprogrammed) and let 'em rip. AND!!! No more generator noise!!!!!! Edited May 17, 2020 by supersop 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mingusmonk Posted May 17, 2020 Share Posted May 17, 2020 3 minutes ago, supersop said: Honestly, I'm shocked this hasn't happened yet. YES, you want them up front for the visual aspect of their playing. BUT, from an ensemble standpoint ... and balancing the amps ... put them in the back. It would eliminate timing issues as well. Put a met in the pits ear (preprogrammed) and let 'em rip. AND!!! No more generator noise!!!!!! The investment and effort in making pulse come from a permanent "back" ensemble is not worth it. UNLESS, you possibly have no battery. You aren't the first to have considered this. But most that have tried it have quickly moved away from it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supersop Posted May 17, 2020 Share Posted May 17, 2020 3 minutes ago, mingusmonk said: The investment and effort in making pulse come from a permanent "back" ensemble is not worth it. UNLESS, you possibly have no battery. You aren't the first to have considered this. But most that have tried it have quickly moved away from it. The solution is actually MATH. All corps use a laptop on the field now anyway. Preprogram the show tempos, hire a mathematician to write an algorithm for proper time delay to the ear pieces based on the pulse focal point ..... done. Keep the speakers on the 35's back sideline and you're covered. This could be extended to every member having an earpiece with the tempo delay based on ping delay. Yes it sounds complicated .. but people who do this for a living would find it extremely simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mingusmonk Posted May 17, 2020 Share Posted May 17, 2020 Just now, supersop said: The solution is actually MATH. All corps use a laptop on the field now anyway. Preprogram the show tempos, hire a mathematician to write an algorithm for proper time delay to the ear pieces based on the pulse focal point ..... done. Keep the speakers on the 35's back sideline and you're covered. This could be extended to every member having an earpiece with the tempo delay based on ping delay. Yes it sounds complicated .. but people who do this for a living would find it extremely simple. The people that I am referring to in my post are people who do it for a living. They did not find it incredibly simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Posted May 17, 2020 Share Posted May 17, 2020 1 hour ago, greg_orangecounty said: I have the perfect solution if they don't want to limit Pit size to under 10,000. Move them to the back side line. Problem solved. Then there might be a problem in how the pit is judged, especially with most percussion judges required to stay close to the sideline. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IllianaLancerContra Posted May 17, 2020 Share Posted May 17, 2020 19 hours ago, greg_orangecounty said: Don't get me started. Next to props pits are second least return on investment. Wouldn't mind them so much but there are so MANY of them! Why? IDK why they need so many marimbas (for example) - if it is cranked through an amplifier whey do you need more than one player per part? Are there really 4-6 different marimba parts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supersop Posted May 18, 2020 Share Posted May 18, 2020 1 hour ago, IllianaLancerContra said: IDK why they need so many marimbas (for example) - if it is cranked through an amplifier whey do you need more than one player per part? Are there really 4-6 different marimba parts? Most corps have 4 or 5 marimba players. Parts are often split like a 1st, 2nd and 3rd trumpet part. They also use different hardness of mallets in different ranges to get a richer sound. Each player having their own responsibilities. Also it's drum corps. We don't have 3 trumpets, 2 mellos, 2 baris, 1 euph and 1 tuba on the field. Do we? More players with identical technique and musicality shows skill ... and creates a more impressive sound. 1 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.