madscout96 Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 (edited) I know many people do not like to hear this but DCI has a responsibility to stay current with what is out there in our activity. An interesting point was brought up over the weekend. You take a corps from 1973 and put them against a corps from 1983, the corps from 83 would come out on top. You take that corps from 1983 and put them against a corps from 1993, the corps from 93 would come out on top. That corps from 1993 goes against a corps from 2003 and it would be a toss up. Kind of an interesting observation. What I got out of that was that it shows that the activity, for lack of a better term, has been kind of stagnant. ... Thank you very much for your insight. I think alot of people who feel strongly one way or the other are very interested in what was actually said by the BoD at the meetings. So are you saying that DCI is changing for changing's sake? Yes, your average corps from the 90's is better than that of the 80's which is better than that of the 70's, and so on. But they're better in what way? Execution? Design? Show concepts? Organizationally? I'm not so sure that you can say that there HASN'T been any improvement of corps between 1993 and 2003. And why have the corps become stronger in certain areas during the last 30 years? They don't just get better, there are reasons and circumstances. How much room is there for improvement in which areas? I know we drum corps people are always in the quest for perfection, but "how much cleaner can we get"? Are there any aspects of the activity that have NOT gotten better over the past 30 years? I would say so. There is no competitive balance in DCI. The title is fought over by BD, Cadets, and Cavaliers every year. In the last 20 years, Madison has won 1 time, SCV has won 1.5 times and Phantom has won .5 times. All other titles have gone to the big 3. As a fan I can say that this makes the competitive aspect of DCI nowhere near as exciting as it could be. Has this been discussed? Does anyone on the BoD see this as a problem? Even the NBA has more parity (Chicago 6, LA 5, Detroit 3, San Antonio 2, Houston 2, Boston 1 championships in the last 20 years). Why must we change for changing's sake? Why can't some things remain the same? Not for the sake of staying the same, but because it's just the best thing to do. Just like any change that is made should be made because it's the best thing to do, not for its own sake. edit: I forgot to ask if any directors of this youth activity had any problem with the members relinquishing control of performance to instructors (i.e., staffers instead of members running soundboard), and if they didn't, why not? I'd really like to hear your point of view on these issues. Thanks Edited January 31, 2006 by madscout96 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Also corps might be getting better because there are less corps so only the best of the best marchers get to make the available spots. This is the reverse of some sports fans gripe that the average team talent has gone down due to over expension in NHL and MLB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 An interesting point was brought up over the weekend. You take a corps from 1973 and put them against a corps from 1983, the corps from 83 would come out on top. You take that corps from 1983 and put them against a corps from 1993, the corps from 93 would come out on top. That corps from 1993 goes against a corps from 2003 and it would be a toss up. Kind of an interesting observation. I'll say. I guess the change to any-key brass wasn't the improvement some tout it to be after all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drumlaw80 Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Self explanatory. This is perhaps the most irrelevant issue in the history of DCI. Who cares if they read it or not, just approve it and move on. I would rather debate what day Vanguard gets salad bar on tour. ^0^ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Pupperton Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 That's a cop-out.Star of Indiana and the Cadets from 1993 show their age as much as anyone. Brass is dirty, visual is pedestrian in some places...all of it is dated compared to the 2005 products of the Cavaliers and Cadets. The reason it holds up fairly well is in the overall design. I'm going to be frank here. There's only so much you can do on a football field. Period. You can pretty it up how you want to, with voice overs, narration and even electronics...but eventually you reach a moment of diminishing returns. Everything becomes a "been there, done that" moment eventually. I wish there was as much cerebral complexity out there as it's made out to be...but this actvity does not deal in specifics. It's better at creating moments that are emotional "brush strokes". This is not to say that you can't glean different things from watching a performance over and over intellectually, but that's a personal reflection. There's only so many ways to go, even if you legalize woodwinds, electronics and every other thing possible to put on the field. Marching band and drum corps are not ever going to have the nuance of a symphony or an opera. It's closest cousin is musical theater (Les Mis, Phantom)...which is one reason that shows that borrow from that idiom do pretty well; it's easy to translate those "big" moments onto the field. After 1993, what was left in order for people to feel like they had all the tools they did in other circuits? Any key? Done. Amps? Done. Now you're on a level playing field with every other marching organization out there. There is no creative wall for you now. If you're a director, and you're reading this on DCP...don't you dare trot out "change for change's sake" like the above quoted example. This fools no one with its ham-handed attempt to try to foist personal agendas onto the idiom. There are very few avenues left to explore. Woodwinds are one. Electronics are another. ...but don't think that any of these are a panacea for creative stagnation. All the toys in the world can't save poor design. They only cover up shortcomings. b**bs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancerlady Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 well, when the original amps vote was held, a few directors publically admitted they didn't see the part about voice. Yeah, as far as they were concerned it was "supposed to be for the pit only"...right? Yeah right.... How soon we all forget that the original proposal was supposed to be for the "pit"...now we have "Lions and Tigers and Bears...oh my".. ^0^ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 Who were they? i believe orwell was one, i'll see if dci.org still has the article somewhere it can be found Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 From someone who was in attendence this weekend in Pasadena, I can tell you that at least in every discussion I was in that it was clearly stated that a staff member can run the board if it is off the field. I know that many people think that fans/audience members may not be taken into consideration but I should tell you that one of the main reasons brought up for this rule was that it would allow for a better experience for both the fans and the members. Amps are now allowed on the activity. Now that they are (whether one likes it or not) there is a responsibility to make sure it goes well. We need to remember that the corps still only have 5 minutes to set up everything, and in that rush it is possible that the controls on the sound board can get out of place. I can honestly say that I do not think any fan would want to listen to a show that has feedback coming out of the speakers for 10 minutes. Allowing someone to adjust and correct the possible feedback is a much better alternative. I know many people do not like to hear this but DCI has a responsibility to stay current with what is out there in our activity. An interesting point was brought up over the weekend. You take a corps from 1973 and put them against a corps from 1983, the corps from 83 would come out on top. You take that corps from 1983 and put them against a corps from 1993, the corps from 93 would come out on top. That corps from 1993 goes against a corps from 2003 and it would be a toss up. Kind of an interesting observation. What I got out of that was that it shows that the activity, for lack of a better term, has been kind of stagnant. I know that many people have strong feelings about these things but please realize the the DCI BoD does not do these thing to give a big "middle finger" to the fans. Also, we need to remember that most of the BoD have been involved in the activity since the mid 70's if not earlier. IMO they know much more about the activity and the history of it they myself and most of the fans. They are the ones that for the past 20+ years have had to endure all of the issues within the activity and help oversee all of its changes, good or bad. you can be current without radically altering the backbone of the activity. because others plug in, drum corps should too? hey the AL has the Dh...so now the NL should too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 That's a cop-out.Star of Indiana and the Cadets from 1993 show their age as much as anyone. Brass is dirty, visual is pedestrian in some places...all of it is dated compared to the 2005 products of the Cavaliers and Cadets. The reason it holds up fairly well is in the overall design. I'm going to be frank here. There's only so much you can do on a football field. Period. You can pretty it up how you want to, with voice overs, narration and even electronics...but eventually you reach a moment of diminishing returns. Everything becomes a "been there, done that" moment eventually. I wish there was as much cerebral complexity out there as it's made out to be...but this actvity does not deal in specifics. It's better at creating moments that are emotional "brush strokes". This is not to say that you can't glean different things from watching a performance over and over intellectually, but that's a personal reflection. There's only so many ways to go, even if you legalize woodwinds, electronics and every other thing possible to put on the field. Marching band and drum corps are not ever going to have the nuance of a symphony or an opera. It's closest cousin is musical theater (Les Mis, Phantom)...which is one reason that shows that borrow from that idiom do pretty well; it's easy to translate those "big" moments onto the field. After 1993, what was left in order for people to feel like they had all the tools they did in other circuits? Any key? Done. Amps? Done. Now you're on a level playing field with every other marching organization out there. There is no creative wall for you now. If you're a director, and you're reading this on DCP...don't you dare trot out "change for change's sake" like the above quoted example. This fools no one with its ham-handed attempt to try to foist personal agendas onto the idiom. There are very few avenues left to explore. Woodwinds are one. Electronics are another. ...but don't think that any of these are a panacea for creative stagnation. All the toys in the world can't save poor design. They only cover up shortcomings. i said this once before, and i'll say it again, and it goes hand in hand with what you said. since the same names are designing the winnig shows that we had ten years ago, and since creativity is stagnated, is it time for new designers? I mean these guys took over for people who were viewed as out of touch...maybe now they are the out of touch ones?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 Are there any aspects of the activity that have NOT gotten better over the past 30 years? I would say so. There is no competitive balance in DCI. The title is fought over by BD, Cadets, and Cavaliers every year. In the last 20 years, Madison has won 1 time, SCV has won 1.5 times and Phantom has won .5 times. All other titles have gone to the big 3. As a fan I can say that this makes the competitive aspect of DCI nowhere near as exciting as it could be. Has this been discussed? Does anyone on the BoD see this as a problem? Just so you know...the VFW Nats were the equivalent of DCI champs back in the 60's....and for the seven years from 64-70, of the 28 top-4 slots, 4 corps took up 21 of 28...and a total of six corps took up 27 of 28. 28 POSSIBLE TOP-4 SLOTS CAVIES: 7 TIMES TROOPERS: 6 TIMES KILTIES: 4 TIMES BAC: 4 TIMES DP VANGUARD: 3 TIMES ROYAL AIRS: 3 TIMES BS: 1 TIME 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.