Who do you think makes up the majority of attendees

[RobH]

What a great and thought-provoking thread!

What I'm hearing here, and mind you, I'm coming from a far different background than most drum corps folks, is that demographics and regional "marketing" play a big role in who attends shows, is this correct?

I THINK I'm also hearing that band directors and people affiliated with bands are much more open and accepting of drum corps than they were in my day - thank Zeus for that!

I'm also, thinking of the DCM/DeKalb show cancellation thread, seeing DCI's hand in determining where the "shows that matter" are to be held - considering finances, schedules, timing, etc.

And as DCI goes, so goes all of drum corps - so here's my question (as one who is not in the know nor has any idea how the DCI BOD operates/thinks/works) - and I'm "hearing" mostly from DCP on all this - SOME DC fans do NOT like this "corporate" methodology that seems to "run" DCI and hence drum corps. Some are happy with the "trends" and direction that drum corps is headed, and some are (I'm reminded of "voices in the wilderness" who go unacknowledged or are ignored altogether) seeing an increasingly DECREASED fan base - which eventually will lead to the ONLY fans being parents of participants, alumni, band kids, and I'm not sure who else!

Are we then heading towards LESS shows but with MORE attendees? I'm thinking that the answer to this is yes - and then, the next logical question is - is THIS going to be the wave of the future until Drum Corps finally reaches a point where NOBODY outside the insular drum corps/music community is even paying attention?

I wish I had an answer!

[MarimbasaurusRex]

(sorry, forgot to quote Jonathan's post!)

An interesting and thoughtful response. I understand what you are saying and where you are coming from. Many many music educators agree with that and I'm not pointing anything toward you or anyone in particular. It's more of a general "band culture" thing. But, here's where I differ...

"Ultimately, that theme could be very simple and easy to play" -- To me, there is no real music that's "easy to play." It's only easy if the player isn't reaching for meaning. The moment it becomes easy is the moment the audience turns off their ears and their hearts, because the musician has already turned off his own. It's all hard to do WELL. Can I hold the attention of the audience with four whole notes tied together? That's much harder than anything Stravinsky ever wrote.

While we are drifting a bit, the topic is who is in the stands? I agree that students need and deserve challenges and diversity. Not saying we should throw out Copeland for Eminem. I'm saying that both styles have educational and entertainment value to the student and audience alike.

What's the difference between playing string parts on a trumpet and playing electric guitar parts on a trumpet?

Here's the rub... (arrr...) No one wrote down exactly what the guitar player did, so it's not so easy to teach. There's no black and white detailed road map to follow, the only literature being arrangements written by people with little or no experience with the style, the teacher also being limited by a lack of training to read between the notes and complete the translation. Naturally, the result isn't good. That result is interpreted to suggest that popular music doesn't translate well. It is supported by saying that students get that stuff already anyway. But they don't "get" it at all because no one teaches it. That's like saying kids should learn about sex on the streets rather than from their parents.

American music education has ignored the finer points of popular music for decades and look at the result. A correction needs to be made, but who will do it if not our music educators? Maybe if we studied and taught popular music as agressively as other styles, our popular music would be very different, dare I say better. Hey, it worked with sex education. Now everybody's doing it! hehe

I played tons of violin parts in drum corps on a keyboard. Yes, that's very difficult to phrase properly and not at all what the composer intended. But, I learned an awful lot about symphonic music and music in general from it. Playing in orchestras is great too, but they still won't let me play the string parts.

The average person in the audience and the music student can both benefit from truly open minded and progressive programming. That sense of fulfilling both my needs and those of the audience was one of the best things about corps that I didn't get in band or orchestra. That was the thrill! I was learning a lot about all kinds of things and people were loving what we were doing, well sometimes.

Besides, I wanna hear Freebird! WOO!! b**bs

Edited March 18, 2006 by MarimbasaurusRex

[xelanosa]

I haven't done a survey of course, but I would guess that most people who pay to come to a show are familiar with the marching activity in general, whether they are alums, band members/alums, or parents of either of the aforementioned categories.

I know this is an old discussion, but I would love to see drum corps become more accessible for the average joe. I think drum corps fans are happy thinking small, but drum corps really could become mainstream with the right kind of exposure.

Don't think it'll ever happen though...too many people who would rather be a niche activity...

[xelanosa]

I know that about 30 years ago, there were LOTS of "average Joes" in the stands - and from what I've read, SOMETHING changed all that - to get where we are now, which is stands filled with drum corps "enthusiasts" and participants, parents, and band kids.

I'd be interested to hear WHEN the big shift away from the "average Joe" actually started - it might be worth researching!

I think you're on to something.

I haven't done research so take this for what it's worth...NOTHING! :)

But, I would guess the shift happened between 1990-95

People may not remember this, but a lot of people thought that SCV should not have won in 89. Many people believed that they won because of hype and their emphasis on showmanship. After that point, technical excellence (something the average joe knows nothing about) became the thing. Something changed in the mentality in determining the GE score. It became much more technical. Entertainment value was sacrificed in the process.

I know someone is going to refute this, but understand this is just an opinion. I'm not claiming to be an expert here.