BOA Bans Ensemble Amplification. Is DCI next?

[TheOneWhoKnows]

15 minutes ago, gbass598 said:

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.

You make a good point here and I understand the sentiment. I think cutting members off certain sections of music is still more organic than reinforcing those that are good. 

At least personally, getting cut off a part provides desire and will to improve to be put back on a part. 

[TheOneWhoKnows]

8 hours ago, Jeff Ream said:

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?

I get the ideas of the policing issues and that's why I think it's just important to have clear stated rules instead of the let's play how far we can take it game. The organizations should come out with you can't reinforce an ensemble. You can reinforce a soloist for the solo. Or a small group for their respective passage. But the entirety of a show can't be reinforced from an ensemble standpoint. 

[Terri Schehr]

13 hours ago, KVG_DC said:

Academy should do a light hearted Monty Python show and use these moves.

It would be better than what they done since the Drum Corpse Bride show.  Disappointing.  I thought they were on their way. A cautionary tale for the Troopers. 

[gbass598]

49 minutes ago, TheOneWhoKnows said:

You make a good point here and I understand the sentiment. I think cutting members off certain sections of music is still more organic than reinforcing those that are good. 

At least personally, getting cut off a part provides desire and will to improve to be put back on a part. 

I think the depends on the student and the staff and the motive when you teach a competitive activity trying to win rings and titles. I think in most cases when a player gets cut off a part they never get put back on it. In my case as a percussion teacher, I have to adapt the entire ensemble moment to the abilities of the entire section 95% percent of the time. Sometimes you can do creative part layering but not always.

In both cases, (electronic enhancement or not) the scenarios become more about competitive success and less about education.

[Tenoris4Jazz]

18 hours ago, gbass598 said:

You aren't wrong. There is also the case of baseball where they seem to be known to create new rules for problems that don't exist.

Pitch clock = great idea

starting extra innings with a base runner = seems a bit unfair and just trying to get the game over so the umps and players can hurry up and get to the bar afterwards.

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.

Way off base here.  The base runner is to keep games from going on and on.  They are trying to make games shorter and more exciting to keep fan interest, not "so the umps and players can hurry up and get to the bar afterwards."  Dumb statement.

As for the shift ban... baseball was never meant to be played with a defensive shift.  Personally, they waited too long to ban it.  As for your "advice"... someone spends 16 years playing baseball and makes it to the show, and you suddenly want them to quit doing what got them there and do something they've never done?  Ridiculous.

[wolfgang]

2 hours ago, gbass598 said:

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.

Here's the difference:  Amplifying only the top players is an artificial sound enhancement of an acoustic sound. Telling your freshmen 3rd trumpets who cannot technically handle the unison 16th note feature run to sit out is not.  In theory, a field judge near where the feature is playing would have an opportunity to catch some of this.

This is no different than having a symphonic band with a technical passage have weaker trumpets sit out a passage at contest/festival. That is not optimum, but it is not an artificial enhancement or addition to an acoustic sound.

Regarding the last sentence, not at all the same thing. You're trying to conflate adding something that isn't real (artificial amplification of acoustic sound using electronic means) with subtracting something that was never there to begin with (kids who cannot technically handle the part and likely weren't playing it anyway).

Edited May 12, 2023 by wolfgang

[Lead]

11 hours 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.

Easy to enforce, the same way DCI self-polices... you hang a penalty out there and let the other groups (who are also competing against you) report violations they see. After the first group gets dinged, it will stop happening.

 

For reference, see: Military Park, 2015 Prelims, Blue Devils 😆

Edited May 12, 2023 by Lead

[Lance]

28 minutes ago, wolfgang said:

/This is no different than having a symphonic band with a technical passage have weaker trumpets sit out a passage at contest/festival. 

 

Yep.  Leaving weaker players off of harder passages isn't anything new in DCI, of course, but it's magnified now that standards of musicianship have gotten so high. 

It's pretty clear to me that DCI corps' solution will be to shrink sections down to a small handful of excellent players and then just mic them up.  It's already being tested more and more every year. Instead of having weaker players go and scatter/dance/move around equipment, just convert them to guard and crank up the amplification.  Duh.   Does double duty with reducing costs, making rehearsals more efficient, and maximizing the visual-heavy rubrics. 

I remember saying that Bloo's onesie/hatless look for downside up would become the norm quickly, and people on here told me I was jumping to conclusions.  I don't think the changes I'm anticipating will happen as quickly as that concept caught fire, but I do think it'll be faster than a lot of people think.  I honestly think most of today's fans and future fans will be perfectly fine with it if/when it does happen.

[gbass598]

1 hour ago, Tenoris4Jazz said:

Way off base here.  The base runner is to keep games from going on and on.  They are trying to make games shorter and more exciting to keep fan interest, not "so the umps and players can hurry up and get to the bar afterwards."  Dumb statement.

As for the shift ban... baseball was never meant to be played with a defensive shift.  Personally, they waited too long to ban it.  As for your "advice"... someone spends 16 years playing baseball and makes it to the show, and you suddenly want them to quit doing what got them there and do something they've never done?  Ridiculous.

Agree to disagree but baseball now has no substance at the major league level. The only stats any care about in the MLB are strikeouts, home runs and anything involving a radar gun. Ask yourself why everyone does a shift now when they didn't 15-20 years ago? Because kids growing up aren't taught to hit the ball to the opposite field. That is a failure of education at the youth level. Maybe there are some parallels when it comes to music education here.

The simple skill of bunting has disappeared from the game. Pure baseball was designed to be a match of skill and strategy. Now it is 100 mph fastballs and home run exit velocity. Stolen bases have disappeared to but are only coming back because of new rule limits preventing how many times a pitcher can throw over to a base.

And I say all of this with a family member who plays professional baseball. He happens to fortunately be in a situation where he is being taught to pitch effectively and not just throw as hard as he can but it seems like hitters just want to pull the ball and hit home runs instead of singles anymore. Some basic fundamentals are disappearing and the shift rule is popping up to cater to those hitters who are one dimensional since they only know how to pull the ball. Want to whine about the shift, drop a few bunts down the opposite field line where nobody is standing and see if they keep shifting on you.

[MGCpimpOtimp]

2 hours ago, TheOneWhoKnows said:

You make a good point here and I understand the sentiment. I think cutting members off certain sections of music is still more organic than reinforcing those that are good. 

At least personally, getting cut off a part provides desire and will to improve to be put back on a part. 

 

53 minutes ago, wolfgang said:

Here's the difference:  Amplifying only the top players is an artificial sound enhancement of an acoustic sound. Telling your freshmen 3rd trumpets who cannot technically handle the unison 16th note feature run to sit out is not.  In theory, a field judge near where the feature is playing would have an opportunity to catch some of this.

This is no different than having a symphonic band with a technical passage have weaker trumpets sit out a passage at contest/festival. That is not optimum, but it is not an artificial enhancement or addition to an acoustic sound.

Regarding the last sentence, not at all the same thing. You're trying to conflate adding something that isn't real (artificial amplification of acoustic sound using electronic means) with subtracting something that was never there to begin with (kids who cannot technically handle the part and likely weren't playing it anyway).

You're both making the assumption that when individuals are miked, that the non miked players aren't playing.

Isn't it more educational to have a non-miked kid playing a part than just cutting parts all together?

We are also forgetting some basic math.

Full acoustic horn line + amplified individuals will be louder/fuller than just amplified individuals

It is still in the group's interest to make their ACOUSTIC sound as big and full as possible, because adding the synthetic on top of a better "base" sound will sound better than the group that doesn't.