DrumCorpsFan27 Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 If drum corps shows should be constrained to only those that get massive crowd responses, then that's a drum corps I probably wouldn't enjoy as much. The diversity in today's programming is what makes corps great. Sure, some groups might eschew the crowd in favor of taking a chance on something different - something 'sophisticated' - but this is one place we see innovation within the activity. Ideally, there would be a happy medium, but to essentially say that we should only have Madison '95s is kind of silly. There was plenty of innovation through the '70s, 80's and 90s and yet corps did get more of the kind of responses being discussed. We also didn't have cookie cutter corps. Madison got great responses, Phantom got great responses, 27th got great responses, Bridgemen got great responses, Spirit got great responses and yet they were all vastly different from each other, IMO much more so than today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 Does DCI want to evolve and expand the number of member corps or does it want to be a small, elitest organization? Sometimes stepping back and reaching out does more for growth than does making lots of money. Which doesn't answer the issue about current sponsors who have supported DCI all these years...and I don't think the current div I corps are all rolling in the long green, so their payments really can not be reduced, IMO. It sounds nice to be all warm and gooey about expanding the numbers and doing these sorts of things, but the logistics and details of the current structure might make it undoable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrumCorpsFan27 Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 Which doesn't answer the issue about current sponsors who have supported DCI all these years...and I don't think the current div I corps are all rolling in the long green, so their payments really can not be reduced, IMO.It sounds nice to be all warm and gooey about expanding the numbers and doing these sorts of things, but the logistics and details of the current structure might make it undoable. Scale back the touring, scale back the toys and you won't need as much money. You will still need a lot, but not as much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 Just one thing, reducing the size of the pit was a major rational for approving amps. That was supposed to reduce costs. I have even said that I could accept amped pits for that reason. However, instead of reducing size and costs, they have added costs to buy the smaller toys...along with the electronics. I remember reading it as one possibility, but for MHO that is irrelevant. I personally like the pits and what they do, and to permit them to do even more is better yet. One small example is what I did with my band this year...I arranged "Ghost Train" for the band, wind and percussion charts. In order to make a train whistle part audible I had the gal playing it step up to a mic we had near the pit at the start of her spot...and in other portions had her stand back from the mic to decrease the sound. Worked VERY well for us. OT: Not to mention the very opening of the show was a micced flute solo! :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
funkrocker049 Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 There was plenty of innovation through the '70s, 80's and 90s and yet corps did get more of the kind of responses being discussed. We also didn't have cookie cutter corps. Madison got great responses, Phantom got great responses, 27th got great responses, Bridgemen got great responses, Spirit got great responses and yet they were all vastly different from each other, IMO much more so than today. Perhaps. Innovation is always needed, and I can't deny that a number of corps have found a formula and stuck to it. Also, a number of other corps have witnessed said formula and tried to jump on the bandwagon. But I still think that to fault a corps for doing something different just because it doesn't elicit a ridiculous crowd response is detrimental to the activity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVQuesty Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 I can not think of one single show that I saw in 2005 that fits your description. I saw most of the top 12 last year, and I cannot think of one single show that I saw in 2005 that doesn't fit his description. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 Scale back the touring, scale back the toys and you won't need as much money. You will still need a lot, but not as much. Touring is touring, IMO. Just because the corps are driving around a smaller area...they are still driving and eating and sleeping on the road...hence the expenses are still high. I hardly think the cost of a few percussion toys will drive up the cost of anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrumCorpsFan27 Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 I remember reading it as one possibility, but for MHO that is irrelevant. I personally like the pits and what they do, and to permit them to do even more is better yet.One small example is what I did with my band this year...I arranged "Ghost Train" for the band, wind and percussion charts. In order to make a train whistle part audible I had the gal playing it step up to a mic we had near the pit at the start of her spot...and in other portions had her stand back from the mic to decrease the sound. Worked VERY well for us. OT: Not to mention the very opening of the show was a micced flute solo! :) The smaller pits and the smaller costs associated with it were a major selling point of the proposal. Of course, we all know about the alterior motives. Sell the proposal one way, get it passed and then ignore what you said and do what you really wanted in the first place. Honestly, these guys ought to run for national office. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrumCorpsFan27 Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 Touring is touring, IMO. Just because the corps are driving around a smaller area...they are still driving and eating and sleeping on the road...hence the expenses are still high.I hardly think the cost of a few percussion toys will drive up the cost of anything. Not if the touring allows you to get back home for several days in the first part of the season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 Not if the touring allows you to get back home for several days in the first part of the season. However, div I corps members are drawn from all over the place...doesn't matter if the Scouts can "go home" if 5 kids come from the Madison area and 130 from the rest of the world. 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.