Jump to content

BOA Bans Ensemble Amplification. Is DCI next?


Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, gbass598 said:

But you know nobody is doing that or is planning to do that with electronics. What they seem to be against is enhancing the existing sound.

There was a small band that won Class A BOA this year. Very small wind section, all amplified. They don't seem to have an issue with that. They just don't like it when big bands do it.

In consideration of the Bands of America philosophy, we recommend the following be implemented for the 2023 BOA season and beyond.

  • Amplifying individuals through a soundboard during tutti sections leads to an
    intentional misrepresentation of what is being performed by the total ensemble. This
    misrepresentation of acoustic quality by enhancing a few individuals is unacceptable.
  • Soloists and featured ensembles may use microphones during their feature section but must be muted from amplification when not being featured.
  • Where a participating band has a limited number of performers (e.g., one player to a part), the use of individual microphones is acceptable.

so who follows the trumpet with a mic around the whole show to be sure it's not coming out of their horn and speaker?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, gbass598 said:

 

banning the shift = dumbest rule ever - want to beat the shift? maybe lay down a bunt or try to hit to the opposite field once in a while.

Philly fans yelled at Ryan Howard to do that for 8 years

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, TheOneWhoKnows said:

I think we can appreciate soundscapes and things that electronics can add to a program. 

However, it is no secret that electronics have been and continue to advance in a way that they can easily replace acoustic instrumentation. It's something we are heavily seeing as an issue on Broadway, more in the touring shows. Keyboards with sound libraries are constantly replacing string sections, fuller brass sections, even percussion instruments. 

While I think this "guidance" is truly more geared towards amplifying members of an ensemble to make the ensemble sound better versus allowing the authentic sound of the ensemble come through whether good or bad. 

However, let's be honest. This is marching band/drum corps. The point is to play the darn instruments. I truly think it is important to protect the acoustic instrument. So, while some are interpreting this "guidance" to mean if you don't have a timpani you can't hit a key and let a timpani sound, I think that is a good thing. 

Again, I can appreciate electronics in programs and enhancements they can provide. But I am not for replacing actual instruments and technique to play actual instruments. 

get rid of shotgun mics for anything other than a soloist and so many issues resolved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

a corps running sound from the box before it became legal. and both only came to light because other groups found out and brought it up.

 

To be fair, while it wasn't mentioned as being allowed, it was wasn't against the rules at the time either. It was undefined.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

but how to enforce? 

having run watches for indoor percussion with the one sound one keystroke rule, unless you're right on top of the synth/laptop players, you truly have no way to see what is and isn't happening. and in order to see those performers, you literally have to be on the floor....a hazard to the judge and the performers.

 

same thing in band. you can't expect judges in the box to try and police this...thats not their job. nor should it be. there was a famously rumored and pretty confirmed story about a Jabba sound effect in DCI 15 years ago before it was legal and a corps running sound from the box before it became legal. and both only came to light because other groups found out and brought it up.

 

so now you'll have the battle of "this group did, that group did"....and i expect little change.

 

not that i like the super re-enforced sound. i still say to this day parts of Crown 19 were so over enhanced i was painful an when it was just the brass, the voulme was noticably lower.and they were rewarded for it too.

Heavily agree on crown ‘19. It feels like they tried to improve the mix, how the mics pick up the corps and their sound for recordings and promotional material, but the synth, choral goo that you can hear throughout is definitely overbearing and detracts quite a bit from their sound!
On another note, I would say too though from the replies I’ve seen on this topic, notably potential doomers that predict hornlines in drum corps will be dramatically downsized to a 20-piece wind ensemble in favor of electronics. Considering the activity as a whole and its connections to marching band/marching arts in general, I don’t see how that would be popular at all, or where corps would be given incentive to do so aside from the “economic motives” for doing so. It would be panned by most certainly the older fans and the younger fans alike, trust and believe that it would. Younger fans don’t just come from nowhere, they come from their own band experiences, they come from marching bands with 80, 100, 150, 200 winds in the most MASSIVE cases. They have directors that have marched drum corps, they don’t and won’t just take what is, especially when it’s been altered extremely in these hypotheticals, from what they know and say immediately that “progress is always good”. Just my take

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello… it's been a while.

First thing's first - let's applaud BOA for doing what it needs to do. If you read their statement, they're basically saying "you're cheating, and we see you". Good on them.

However, what we should do is dig into the subtlety of what's going on, and how for the marching arts we can move this forward.

IMO, they've laid down a challenge, but have forgotten the Piano Principle. I'll get to that, but I'm going to write this stuff out and *anyone* feel free to use it. I've been arguing this position for about 18 years, so it's not a difficult one to regurgitate, but there are some subtleties that might not be evident at first read.

REINFORCEMENT

This concept is where an analog sound is made louder to achieve a different balance. Initially brought (en masse) for pit instruments, this allows your 4 marimbas to be trimmed down to 2, and still be the same in the ensemble texture. Why is this good? Logistics for dropping 2 marimbas might be an annual budget savings that's material, and the wear of hard mallets protects the longevity of the instrument. When the Blue Devils did this the first time, they had one small amp per keyboard, and it was excellent. Now it's all evolved to scenes and two large stacks of amps. It's debatable that this is ideal for a number of reasons -- particularly because when techs talk about scenes, they're actively changing the volumes of microphones. The original intent of instrumental reinforcement was to raise the overall amplitude of specific quiet percussive instruments. Altering the volume takes away some player responsibility. Adding effects is altering the original signature of the instrument, and should be avoided. More on that...

Amplified voice has been a lightning rod since The Zone and The Cadets. In addition, it should be noted that the Blue Devils were also shown to have altered a voice amplification by taking "that laugh" down an octave but were not penalised --  and they won the title that year. Effects should 100% be off-limits, with some very light exceptions for equalisation that's set-and-forget, particularly with keyboards. Any digital signal processing that is intended to alter the timbre should be off limits.

In this statement by BOA, they are effectively saying that the bands are cheating, and they're right. In olden times, we'd call someone marching a spot but not really playing a "plug". It happened for several reasons, usually injury or someone quitting. What BOA is describing here is effectively mic every instrument, and play the ones that are better. This means that a band can easily and effectively have lots of plugs all over the field and still give a more full sound. It's my opinion that if all reinforcement was limited to the Pit Box, this would not be a problem. You can also give the 12-15 feet behind the Pit Box a pass so you can set up a STATIONARY mic for soloists. Drum corps and brass solos basically don't need this (though some might debate), it's definitely more reasonable for a clarinet solo as an example. If you don't allow wireless mics, or more specifically microphones cannot be moved/carried during a show, it eliminates this cheating.

SAMPLED vs PRE-RECORDED vs SEQUENCED

If you've made it this far, you're into it. Simply waving these three words together is a blunt exercise. Let's define them:

Sampled instrument - A set of recorded notes of an instrument that are intended to be played back to recreate a real instrument, often invoked through computer software and triggered by both analog and digital methods.

Pre-recorded - A playing of multiple notes, sounds, or a combination to emulate an instrument playing a passage with the musicianship as part of what is recorded. The playback of a passage.

Sequenced - The playing of a synthesiser or sampler with the automatic triggering of a digital ordering. It is the modern equivalent of a player-piano sheet. Invoking a sequence allows the playback of any passage without the need of memory or musicianship.

So this is where we come to the Piano Principle. If you want to have a piano sound, do you bring a piano? No; it's unreasonable. Should you bring a keyboard that can create these sounds? If you want a piano, it's the only reasonable thing to do. Should you allow a piano sound with a marching ensemble? That's a creative rule decision.

But what about a tympani, as was brought up? Maybe there should be some consideration to not having to bring tubs if you're only going to use it as an effect for a few seconds, etc. There is a correct method to interpret this, and a basic flow of questions would help put marching organisations back on the right path.

Is the instrument analog? If yes, is it allowed? For example, many associations don't allow double-reed instruments to be marched for safety. Assuming it's conventional, you allow it on the field.

Is your instrument in need of amplification/reinforcement? If it's a marched instrument, then it should only be allowed to have reinforcement by a solo-ing mic stand that is stationary. If it's a keyboard instrument, it should be reinforced, but the volumes should be maintained by the player, or should be set by a technician and left for the entirety of the show. No scenes. Technicians should only be given the option to turn a system off in case of malfunction.

If the instrument is a sample, there are some guidelines that should make it fairly simple to maintain musicianship. Notes should be played by the student. Volume should be played by the student. The motion of triggering a sound is done by the student, and triggering must be restricted to a physical implementation. For example, a pedal can be used to imitate a piano pedal. Pressing any button/key should cause a representative note/volume, and one press should be one sound. A sampled instrument should also be fully licensed and allowed for the use of playback without copyright concerns.

From this, an artistic question should be answered by the governing body - specifically where the sampling of instruments should be for a similar kind of trigger, and the instrument should not be equal to any other. You should not have a piano-style keyboard playing flute sounds when you have flutes on the field. You should not have a piano-style keyboard playing violin sounds. The implement should match, thus if someone was playing a tympani sample, it should be played in the manner a tympani would be played, and that's with a drum trigger.

Sampled instruments vs Sampling

Thus far, we've discussed sampled instruments, intending to be played back to represent its analog. Sampling can also be unrealistic. For example, sampling a car horn for an effect. The sound can be modulated, but it's not a traditional instrument. Ensembles should be encouraged to use the real thing when possible, and judged better when they do. Sometimes that's not realistic, so in the case where a sampled effect is used, **it should not be modulated**. This also applies for sampled instruments. If you sample a car horn that honks in F, it should not be used in other pitches, nor modulated or effected or signal-processed as part of a performance. Any non-analog instrument should not have effects used as part of the performance.

As part of this requirement, any sampled/digital sound needs to be triggered by a student, in real time, in the Pit Box, and should not be altered or adjusted by a technician.

Conclusion, for now

The overriding principle behind all of these considerations is universal; the virtuosity of the student shall not be altered, hidden, or improved by the use of technology. There are some logistical and artistic wins to be had, but the Huygens-Frenzel Principle is undefeated, and there's no room for cheating. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huygens–Fresnel_principle) Electronic sounds, even sampled analog sounds, need to work within the ensemble, and you cannot hide kids or over-present your best. The ensemble sound is what makes marching so amazing in person, and to effectively cheat and remove what is the soul of marching is something that I'm glad is finally having a stand made.

Think back to SCV doing Miss Saigon, and all the Foley work. That is the soul of marching arts. A quote that has always stuck with me is that "art is in the resistance of the materials". It's true; marching music isn't supposed to be push-button music box cranks. Moving forward intelligently can leave the soul of the art in a very good place, while providing artistic help and remove logistical nightmares.

I listened to this evolution over my years with DCI in the capacity of audio recording, and it's never been different at any level. Leave the musicianship to all the kids. That's why we love this activity.

  • Thanks 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

drumcat - 

Thank you for your brilliant analysis of this issue. You have provided a well-written and comprehensive piece.

For several years now, I have felt uneasy about the way technology has reshaped our beloved product. We are treading on the artificial, toward an unnatural substitute, an illusion, so to speak. Way too much of this in today’s America, I think. Limitations are needed

Yes, I’m old (72). I’m sure this is a factor, but so what? 

You know, I am amazed about the detail now possible in producing artificial flowers and plants. I see some incredible results there. But, my greatest pleasure is derived from being in the presence of the real, growing, genuine articles on which those man-made products are based.

Your Conclusion, for now segment is excellent!  Much appreciated.  👍

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, gbass598 said:

Or they call the organization Music for All. Which sounds pretty inclusive to me.

Music for All has eight programs according to their website:

  • Bands of America
  • Music for All Summer Symposium
  • Music for All National Festival
  • Educational Resources
  • Advocacy in Action
  • Orchestra Programming
  • Choir Programming
  • Affiliate Regional Music Festivals

This thread is about rulemaking for Bands of America.  Those rules do not apply to the other seven program areas of Music for All.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So now that we are railing against bands who mic/amplify their better players to sound better (which I agree is not in the spirit of fair play), when do we start railing against bands and drum corps horn lines who cut their weaker players off of their parts to make the ensemble sound better?

Same concept of hiding an ensemble's flaws, its just the electronics aren't involved. We all know it happens and everybody does it and has been doing it for years. I'm a percussion guy and its a lot harder to hide us because everyone can see hands move but its a lot easier to fake playing a wind instrument.

In the spirit of "you are only as strong as your weakest member" people should believe that is unacceptable too.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, drumcat said:

Hello… it's been a while.

First thing's first - let's applaud BOA for doing what it needs to do. If you read their statement, they're basically saying "you're cheating, and we see you". Good on them.

However, what we should do is dig into the subtlety of what's going on, and how for the marching arts we can move this forward.

 

Seriously, thank you for typing all this. The insight is greatly appreciated and fun to read. 

I find it interesting that it's becoming almost controversial to say we want musicianship to be musicianship. I really think there is common ground where we can appreciate effects that electronics can have on a program, but also state that the players should play the freaking instruments. And maybe go a little further and say there should be organic sound and not reinforced (as far an ensemble goes) sound. 

  • Like 2
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...