GreenMelloMan Posted March 27, 2002 Share Posted March 27, 2002 Ok, in the past, I've argued with a friend over certain values and interpretations in sound quality. The biggest thing that often comes up is that of Phantom Regiment vs. other corps such as BD. The other person says that PR's sound quality is gross...that the low brass plays crass and *beyond good tone* ('93 and '96 [3rd movement is most noticeable for '96] being the most noticeable examples), whereas other corps stay within the characteristic sounds of the particular instrument...my argument is that the style that PR plays with is effective from an audience stand point. It's exciting and emotional (then he says it's loud but gross, and the only reason they place[d] so high is because of very good staging and a well-written production)...you get the general idea. What do you people think on this topic? What presents a good show, tone-quality wise? Who has the best tone-quality vs. a not so good, but effective tone-quality? Other thoughts? --And just for a side note, Phantom '93 is one of my fav. shows... :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrshowfan Posted March 27, 2002 Share Posted March 27, 2002 I think PR has a good sound. Its not as good as it once was though. An example would be the 89 recording, which I think are their best sounds, vs. the 98 recording, which isnt their best sound at all times. I do think that what they present is effective from an musical standpoint. I just dont think it sounds the same. For a great recording listen to the 93 Fire of Eternal Glory studio performance, now that is sound quality. What presents a good show tone quality wise?, I would say overall balance and good marching technique, thats why I think BD always puts out good horn lines, they do the best of those two I just mentioned. I n music ed classes they taught us the pryamid effect, meaning more low (bass) & less high (soprano), due to the natural freqeuncies they produce you will need more bass to balance the higher end soprano. This would be ideal. Some corps have a inverted triangle (Madison the last few years) Some really bring out the mid voices (Star and CBC). Ideally, the listener should be to to hear every voice without individuals sticking out of the ensemble or blasting. Add marching a placement on the field and balance becomes a major issue, one that some corps struggle with and other corps excell at. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenMelloMan Posted March 27, 2002 Author Share Posted March 27, 2002 What presents a good show tone quality wise?, I would say overall balance and good marching technique, thats why I think BD always puts out good horn lines, they do the best of those two I just mentioned. Good point, but this is another thing I've discussed with people before. Many people think that BD has a good hornline, but not necessarily the best balance because with the jazz twist they put on a lot of their stuff, they tend to favor the soprano/alto voices over others...I've heard people say Cadets, Cavaliers, and SCV generally have the better balance most of the time...(out of the current top few corps...I'm not gonna talk about EVERY SINGLE corps hornline balance on here...). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blaringbrass Posted March 29, 2002 Share Posted March 29, 2002 PR may have had a gross sound but everyone had that sound, not just one or two people, Its really gross when you have a MB or corp that have players like that. All-though loud and not gross is much better than HOLY COW! and nasty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTBeck1 Posted March 30, 2002 Share Posted March 30, 2002 In my personal opinion, I think its ok, if not necessary for the low brass (especialy the euphs ]:-) ) to put a little edge to the sound at extreem volumes. Even with the bugles, thoes horns just cannot play very loud before some tone quality needs to be sacrificed. I've always hated it when intructors would tell the high brass to back off a bit so the low brass can be heard. Heaven forbid you would ask the low brass for some balls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted March 30, 2002 Share Posted March 30, 2002 The other person says that PR's sound quality is gross...that the low brass plays crass and *beyond good tone* ('93 and '96 [3rd movement is most noticeable for '96] being the most noticeable examples), whereas other corps stay within the characteristic sounds of the particular instrument... Um...I don't know about anyone else, but I happen to think that Phantom 96 was one of the best-sounding hornlines I've ever heard. They had a deep, dark sound that I consider to be ideal to drum corps hornlines, and when they hit those power chords-- :0 dang, what a sound. While there is a concept of good sound quality hornlines go for, there are different types of hornline sound, and Phantom has their own style. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CozyChopsCom Posted April 1, 2002 Share Posted April 1, 2002 So many to mention: PR, especially in the 80s and early-mid 90s. I loved the years when PR and Star went heavy on low brass, too. I always enjoy the mid-voices of the Cadets. Cavies! SCV! The Marion Cadets had only 5 brass in the early-mid 90s, but they blended well. Srs.: Buccs, Bush, Empire, Minnesota Brass. Kilties, Brigs, Cru, Hurcs, Grenadiers, Metropolitains.... Cozy www.cozychops.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayM Posted April 3, 2002 Share Posted April 3, 2002 I do agree that Phantom was maybe a little edgy in '96, but it's really cool to listen to. You can just feel the power of that hornline. OTOH, the 2001 SCV hornline blows me away everytime I listen. I think it's all those dang euphoniums they've got out there. (:-D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevsBari02 Posted April 7, 2002 Share Posted April 7, 2002 I would have to agree with Dave about Phantom 96. I was there to hear them in person during Championship week. I can honestly say it was the best hornline I have heard live on the field. (Obviously, there have been great hornlines since then, but Phantom 96 gets my vote for best hornline). Something that must be understood is that different corps have different timbres, and/or different approaches that become very apparent in their sound. For example, Phantom 96, was very different than Madison 96, just as Cadets 97, was very different than Vanguard 97. Getting to the point, if are simply talking about sound quality, and the inner issues within: Star of Indiana's hornlines on several occasions was the epitome of what a championship hornline shoud sound like. Of course, Phantom has fielded some incredible hornlines as well. Phantom 89 was a doozie. Man, that hornline was powerful. Some may think crazy of me, but Southwind in recent years has had some great points of sonority in their hornlines as well, especially 2000. Great sonorous, full, resonant sound. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sluggo Posted April 12, 2002 Share Posted April 12, 2002 ahhhh, '96 PR....'nough said! maybe your friend was just jealous that he wasn't in the hornline that year! Me personally, I really can't recall a good Cavie hornline, except for '95, and '00-'01. But they are getting better and better...####, could you imagine what the Cavies would be like if they had a killer Hornline, their famous killer Drumline, and their Awesome Guard all together in one year.......one can only wish! With BD, in my opinion, they are always awesome, but most of the time they have the hard licks is when most of the hornline is standing around and jamming. They are not moving 3-8 across the field in a jazz run. So they can work on their intonnation a little more. 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.