Time to make all electronics part of the performance?

[ironlips]

Full disclosure: As an audio producer, I have made my living with microphones, mixers and all manner of related hard(and soft)ware for over 40 years. And initiating all that vocal business on the field is pretty much my fault too, although achieved acoustically back then.

It's far too late to suck that genie back into the magic lamp. The better solution would be to judge it by the same high standards that apply to the rest of the production. Give it a number, a box under Ensemble Music, and have qualified people evaluate it.

In the  "big girl world", loudspeakers and PA are designed to produce sound REINFORCEMENT, not REPLACEMENT. Your sub-woofer is negating your low brass? Oops. Your number reflects that under-achievement vis-a-vis your competitor who demonstrates better skill with EQ, levels, panning and EFX.

Why should this sonic element be considered any less important than say, the accuracy and technique of your rifle line?

As for who's at the mixer during a performance, that must be a legitimate performer. If you can audition a synth player, electric guitarist or bass drummer, you can audition a house mixer.

Edited September 5, 2022 by ironlips
clarity

[DAvery]

Thirty years ago when I started using electronics with my band I used a student as a mixer. They were stationed in the pit, but directed by me sitting in the stands by a wireless headset. The same could be done today. Better yet, why can’t someone sitting in the stands wirelessly control the sound board? If you are saying the sound board operator has to be a member, how do you enforce those situations?

[Jeff Ream]

5 hours ago, ironlips said:

Full disclosure: As an audio producer, I have made my living with microphones, mixers and all manner of related hard(and soft)ware for over 40 years. And initiating all that vocal business on the field is pretty much my fault too, although achieved acoustically back then.

It's far too late to suck that genie back into the magic lamp. The better solution would be to judge it by the same high standards that apply to the rest of the production. Give it a number, a box under Ensemble Music, and have qualified people evaluate it.

In the  "big girl world", loudspeakers and PA are designed to produce sound REINFORCEMENT, not REPLACEMENT. Your sub-woofer is negating your low brass? Oops. Your number reflects that under-achievement vis-a-vis your competitor who demonstrates better skill with EQ, levels, panning and EFX.

Why should this sonic element be considered any less important than say, the accuracy and technique of your rifle line?

As for who's at the mixer during a performance, that must be a legitimate performer. If you can audition a synth player, electric guitarist or bass drummer, you can audition a house mixer.

last i remember seeing it was on that sheet as one of the many facets of ensemble.

[ironlips]

45 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

last i remember seeing it was on that sheet as one of the many facets of ensemble.

DCA? DCI? Point allocation? Criteria reference descriptors?

I think some of the hipper adjudicators give it passing attention under general "balance", but for something as consequential to the overall experience as sound reinforcement actually is, it's treated peripherally, as an afterthought.

Opinion: Even the "top" corps do not approach professional standards in terms of delivering consistent, acceptable sound to the majority of the audience, and nobody is holding them to account.

Some of this is in the design itself, the rest is tech.

[Fred Windish]

Thus, the challenge I see in all of this demand for growth and creativity in the productions I’ve enjoyed for so many years. That is, how best to fairly reward it under such rapid change.

To me, each year a performing group strives to keep its audience engaged and intrigued. They do this by offering more for consumption.  More volume, more color, more interesting body movement, more emotional layers, and new visual interest in staging. The goal, to remain fresh and, of course, be recognized as one of the very best of its type. The highest stamp of approval affixed at season’s end.

There really was a time when drum corps was judged to determine which organization assembled the finest group of people blowing air through tubing, using their hands to strike surfaces with sticks, their legs to take them from one place to another in perfectly standardized intervals!  But, now?

Nearly unlimited creativity, design, and technology have created a dilemma in scoring to determine who does it all best.  That is, until next near brings a new definition of what constitutes “best.”

I have a problem understanding placing a higher value on paid-for technology over excellence in individual human achievement.  Somehow, electronic buttons, dials and sliders have taken charge, it seems.

You know, these newer enhancements are never going away. How many groups can afford to keep up at this level?  Not many, I’d say.

But, hey . . . . I still enjoy it all. It’s fabulous !  

 

( Perhaps, any numerical rankings should be based more on human physical achievement and talent of students rather than artificial embellishments available over-the-counter.)

🤔

 

 

 

Edited September 6, 2022 by Fred Windish

[Mello Dude]

The only problem I see is that more expensive sound equipment is more expensive for a reason....it's better.  A LOT better.  We really don't need score based EVEN MORE on money.  This is the main reason I was against this stuff in DCI to begin with.  People that work with this equipment KNOW #### well that good sound requires GOOD equipment....and it isn't cheap.  It's truly you get what you pay for in this industry when used properly.  What SHOULD be judged it whether or not you are properly integrating it into your show and not using it as a crutch to cover the other 100 members on the field playing acoustic instruments.  It's already an issue with props/money..now to add this?  Just no. 

[Jeff Ream]

12 hours ago, ironlips said:

DCA? DCI? Point allocation? Criteria reference descriptors?

I think some of the hipper adjudicators give it passing attention under general "balance", but for something as consequential to the overall experience as sound reinforcement actually is, it's treated peripherally, as an afterthought.

Opinion: Even the "top" corps do not approach professional standards in terms of delivering consistent, acceptable sound to the majority of the audience, and nobody is holding them to account.

Some of this is in the design itself, the rest is tech.

DCI. the last time they released the sheets several years ago A&E was on there. i dont remember the specifics or verbiage. i'll check General effect media later i know they put some stuff about sheets up but i dont remember if MA was one of the sheets. i think it was just effect they posted.

 

DCA no clue what their sheets look like anymore. hell they cant even put performance times on their website for championships weekend.

 

as far as how it's adjudicated i think a lot of it falls under how much knowledge the judge has on how it all works. 

[cixelsyd]

14 hours ago, DAvery said:

Thirty years ago when I started using electronics with my band I used a student as a mixer. They were stationed in the pit, but directed by me sitting in the stands by a wireless headset. The same could be done today. Better yet, why can’t someone sitting in the stands wirelessly control the sound board? If you are saying the sound board operator has to be a member, how do you enforce those situations?

You would enforce it the same way you enforce the age rule.  If caught in violation, your corps is disqualified from that contest and all remaining contests of that season.

[Jeff Ream]

11 minutes ago, cixelsyd said:

You would enforce it the same way you enforce the age rule.  If caught in violation, your corps is disqualified from that contest and all remaining contests of that season.

so who patrols the stands? I don't ask to be a smart ###, but this was a legitimate question that came up in my former band circuit. 

 

someones in the stands on a device. is it someone working sound or watching the live feed from the ESPn app? you have to literally go to where that person is, interrupting however many people trying to watch the show to check. Also, who provides the person checking? who pays for them? while in theory without more than a quick thought for this, there's really no legit way to enforce it once you actually dig deep

[ironlips]

"...What SHOULD be judged it whether or not you are properly integrating it into your show"

Exactly.