drumcat Posted October 7, 2005 Share Posted October 7, 2005 (edited) I'm still anti-amp in general, but as I've said all along, DCI corps staff members will do a pretty good job of using it. I also understand why you would want to amplify keyboard instruments. I even think that it's a good use to, as someone else said, "amp your udu". This isn't what I'm hear to talk about. Initially, and to this very day, I do not like the fact that human voice can be amped. That's the one caveat with the amplification rule that makes me very, very scared. I think it's turned out to be a well-founded fear. To date, the implementation has very real, very practical problems left unsolved: Quality of sound Who judges what etc. etc. After seeing every show with amplification live this year at least twice, and having listened to every amped show several times, I've come to an interesting observation. The Bluecoats had a legitimate use of vocals. They didn't speak anything other than percussively. They used a known and common method. They also for the most part used good quality without overdriving their headmics. There was one notable exception. (9:07) I can tell you that I have a personal distaste for everyone elses use of amped vocals. Seattle handheld me through their show, but at least it was done pleasantly. The Blue Devils intertwined their vocals very heavily; in fact they couldn't have had a show that made any sense without them. The Cadets... well, sometimes you have to let art just be art. B) So I can say that most definitely the Bluecoats challenged my thinking. I'm still of a mind that we'd be better off with a vocal amp moratorium for a few years at least. I don't think it fits. There are still 525,600 reasons that it shouldn't be allowed. But for the sake of argument here, did the Bluecoats use of amped vocals challenge anyone else's belief about eliminating amped vocals? Edited October 7, 2005 by drumcat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bawker Posted October 7, 2005 Share Posted October 7, 2005 Not in the slightest. I was just glad it was as short as it was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACustom19 Posted October 7, 2005 Share Posted October 7, 2005 The tabla speak was tight. Just like the whole corps. They rocked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancerlady Posted October 7, 2005 Share Posted October 7, 2005 Did they challenge my thinking? No! It just made me wonder why they went there? If that's what you mean by "challenge"? And please don't say I'm bagging on them, I love Bluecoats. I just felt that part was unnecessary. That's all. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
84BDsop Posted October 7, 2005 Share Posted October 7, 2005 I'd have to hear the show (all I lknow is the broadcast stuff), but the same argument could be made for BDZ and Cadets. It's really a judgement call...I found Boston and Crown 04 irritating int he extreme, but had no problem with the BD and Cadets 05 narration or amped drumspeak.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCVdrums Posted October 8, 2005 Share Posted October 8, 2005 did the Bluecoats use of amped vocals challenge anyone else's belief about eliminating amped vocals? yes, i thought that there may be room for amps when I heard the 'Coats tastefullness and sound quality... I definately challenged my view Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCImaniac Posted October 8, 2005 Share Posted October 8, 2005 "There are still 525,600 reasons that it shouldn't be allowed." I like how you threw in the 525,600 in your post. lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liebot Posted October 8, 2005 Share Posted October 8, 2005 i think bluecoats was the least offensive. i think BD's was the most effective - i think they had the best quality of sound/their speaker was pretty convincing. i also think it fit pretty clearly with the show and wasn't too distracting. seattle's was awful - no two ways about it. just bad. cadets' drumspeak wasn't too bad - that one guy swallowed the mic, but i thought it was interesting/added something. bjorkspeak, on the other hand, just made me laugh. i don't care if it's in the original song - still annoying. i guess this year i sort of accepted that vocals were going to be used in drum corps this year. none of these convinced me that vocals were necessary. bluecoats' offended me least, though, so i guess that's good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted October 8, 2005 Share Posted October 8, 2005 having seen dvd's, i gotta say no one's usage made me like it. having now seen 4 bands do it, they only reinforced my hatred of it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scouttimp Posted October 8, 2005 Share Posted October 8, 2005 I may have said this before... I saw Bloo in Columbia MO, and in the middle of the show I said "who is talking? I can't hear the drum corps... Oh. It's the Bluecoats." 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.