perc2100 Posted February 11 Posted February 11 8 hours ago, mingusmonk said: It is not realistically attainable to manage 165 IEMs moving dynamically across a 57,000 square foot field for precise execution needs of all performers today. Want proof? Nobody is doing it. Not that the creative minds we have in audio engineering haven't considered all of this and beyond. Their evaluations of the benefits of attempting such feat have left them on the side of "not today." It would highly amusing for me personally to sit in a rehearsal with 165 drum corps members who are using IEMs while trying to compensate for acoustic physics 2 Quote
greg_orangecounty Posted February 11 Posted February 11 I have no clue what these things cost, but if it's yet another expensive gadget corps must purchase to keep up score wise then I'm against it. If they're not expensive, then, fine. 1 1 Quote
perc2100 Posted February 11 Posted February 11 25 minutes ago, cixelsyd said: Of course. The same timing benefit can be exploited just by having key personnel using IEMs to solve key timing challenges. It does not have to be every musician, full show. Then why is anyone doing it on any scale? As for the following, you seem to be reading things into my posts that are not there... ... no. ... no. Budget suck - yes. $2 million just for electronics for one corps - no. Your question is too narrow. I have a more general response which may help. It is not controversial to point out that the instrument/equipment suppliers have had an outsized influence on the format of the drum corps activity for the past 100 years. Fact is, before any of that happened, they were already making a bigger score marketing another one of their formats (band) to schools. Suppliers are not all bad when you realize they played a key role in creating these things we enjoy. They do not, however, make the best decisions for the long-term interest of all these activities. Their mission is to sell more of their product. And we can all see how much more of their product they are selling to scholastic bands. Fair play to them - there is a lot of tax-subsidized funding behind scholastic band budgets. The problem is that drum corps do not have that kind of funding, and therefore cannot make the same choices as scholastic bands and still operate sustainably. (Again, that should not be controversial to point out either... but if you want to debate that, be my guest. That is what the forum is for.) Just for clarity, are you implying that, say, Yamaha Music is telling Cavaliers, "we have this amazing new thing we 100% need you to use so we can mass-market it!" I guess in _some_ ways that's correct, such as Yamaha plausibly telling Cavaliers, "we're ditching Randy May carriers and after spending many years researching and developing these, we need you to try our new carriers this summer." That plausibly happened as more of a "we're discontinuing X so you need to use Y" sense. In nearly every instance of a new toy coming to drum corps it's almost always either a staffer/designer who saw the new toy somewhere else first and wanted to play with it, or a staffer/designer approaching the company about something they want that doesn't exist and working together to 'birth' a new product (sometimes it's a little of both, like if a drum stick company approaches an artist about a Signature Stick and then the company & artist collaborate on what they both want/need out of the stick). Quote
Jeff Ream Posted February 12 Posted February 12 (edited) On 2/11/2026 at 9:55 AM, cixelsyd said: 165 is not necessary. Only about 112 performers in the prototypical "full corps" contribute sounds. And of those, the stationary front ensemble instruments would not require adjustments for varying field position during the show. unless they move. or are staged out on the field instead of up front Edited February 12 by Jeff Ream Quote
Jeff Ream Posted February 12 Posted February 12 21 hours ago, Lance said: is there a specific content category that takes into account difficulty and achievement regarding "lining up tricky passages, lining up cold attacks/front to back moments, etc? Or is that accounted for under "rep" with GE? it'd be more ensemble Quote
cixelsyd Posted February 12 Posted February 12 30 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said: unless they move. or are staged out on the field instead of up front That is why I specified "stationary front ensemble instruments"... Quote
Jeff Ream Posted February 12 Posted February 12 2 hours ago, cixelsyd said: That is why I specified "stationary front ensemble instruments"... too many people forget thats an option Quote
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.