michsta8 Posted July 17, 2006 Author Share Posted July 17, 2006 Agreed. Why foreclose the opportunity to do something fabulous just for the sake of keeping it the same? HH you mean like Coke? Well said Keith and thank you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kusankusho Posted July 17, 2006 Share Posted July 17, 2006 Agreed. Why foreclose the opportunity to do something fabulous just for the sake of keeping it the same? HH Laser light shows - I can see it now - it will be glorious! All we need is a rule change..... :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawn craig Posted July 17, 2006 Share Posted July 17, 2006 Although I would generally prefer shows without amped singing and narration, it is usually short and only temporarily distracting. I just broke down yesterday and bought the 06 DCI Season Pass. In listening to the clips, it struck me that the amped pits are overwhelming the brass. Is this noticeable at live shows?Vic Russell Yes it has been and in the reveiws of shows various people have commented on it. I think this is a much bigger problem than amped voice. It's ussually the ballads and other soft sections of a show like during solos and small ensemble moments when the amps are making the pit way to loud. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt_S Posted July 17, 2006 Share Posted July 17, 2006 Although I would generally prefer shows without amped singing and narration, it is usually short and only temporarily distracting. I just broke down yesterday and bought the 06 DCI Season Pass. In listening to the clips, it struck me that the amped pits are overwhelming the brass. Is this noticeable at live shows?Vic Russell No, it's not. At Battle Creek, the horns were still far more powerful than the amps, and that was true of every corps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kusankusho Posted July 17, 2006 Share Posted July 17, 2006 (edited) The preceeding are two posts by (I assume) honest intelligent folks, completely contradicting each other. It just illustrates how subjective this all is. Edited July 17, 2006 by kusankusho Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawn craig Posted July 17, 2006 Share Posted July 17, 2006 As for amped vocals, for me personally I've only heard one use I thought was sorta cool and that's Crossmen this year. I think it works because: 1. It's not narration, it's acting. 2. It's for only one segment of the show, doesn't go on and on. 3. Each actor's part is very limited. Actual narration doen't work for me in the concert hall, and doesn't work for me much at all. The music is SO MUCH MORE POWERFUL! Singing, well I'm not that big of fan of singing in drum corps (amped or unamped) because the quality of singing is just not on par with the quality of the brass and percussion playing. It's ok if it's short, just enough to give the desired contrast in the show. Boston 00 was ok, but really went on longer than I would have liked; kept thinking when are they going to start playing? (loved the rest of the show). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt_S Posted July 17, 2006 Share Posted July 17, 2006 (edited) you mean like Coke? Actually, Coke makes a great point. I'm going to assume you were referring to New Coke, which was clearly a miss. However, we've had Cherry Coke for years and years, and just recently we've added Vanilla Coke and Lime Coke - all three of which seem to have been hits. Not all variations of Coke are going to work the way we all want them to, but sometimes doing something unusal can meet with great success. In much the same way, amped vocals will be good or bad, depending on how they're used, and our own personal tastes will dictate what each of us individually consider to be good or bad. Edited July 17, 2006 by Maedhros Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeBob Posted July 17, 2006 Share Posted July 17, 2006 Agreed. Why foreclose the opportunity to do something fabulous just for the sake of keeping it the same? I enter into this thread with trepidation. In fact, this is probably a mistake. Personally, I'm of the opinion that limitations foster creativity. They force the designer to think of new and innovative ways to present a program that works within those limitations. It's not so much "keeping it the same" as it is "playing by a consistent set of rules." Apart from the competition of the corps on the field, there's a meta-game at work here: What can you do within the restrictions you've been given? Whatever those restrictions are, relaxing them actually makes good show design less impressive, IMO, because the tools aren't as limited. If I give you a coffee can, some nails, and a block of wood and you turn them into a robot, I'll be impressed. If you manage to make a robot out of gears, cables, prosthetic limbs, and other electronic and mechanical hardware, not so much. Even if it can crush humanity under its metallic heel. Does that make sense? I think there's direct proportion between the stringency of the restrictions placed on the process and the impressiveness of the process's result. "Wow, I can't believe the sounds they were able to create with such a limited ensemble." I've often said that we can't have 300 30-year-olds out there playing electric guitar and call it "drum and bugle corps." However, everyone has his own idea of just what "drum and bugle corps" is. Some draw the line at a stationary pit or the number of valves on a horn, and others, apparently, don't really draw a line at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Laubhan Posted July 17, 2006 Share Posted July 17, 2006 Does that make sense? I think there's direct proportion between the stringency of the restrictions placed on the process and the impressiveness of the process's result. "Wow, I can't believe the sounds they were able to create with such a limited ensemble." I respect that point of view, and have found myself saying similar things from time to time. At the same time, I look at a show like 2004 BD, and think how many of those really cool, creative train effects wouldn't have been possible if it weren't for amplifaction. To me, anytime you've got an issue that's got so much gray area, I'd rather give the license to the corps themselves. As I've said earlier, it's in their best interest to entertain, and I think every single designer hold being effective to the audience as a priority. I've often said that we can't have 300 30-year-olds out there playing electric guitar and call it "drum and bugle corps." However, everyone has his own idea of just what "drum and bugle corps" is. Some draw the line at a stationary pit or the number of valves on a horn, and others, apparently, don't really draw a line at all. That's true. Just like any art form, people will need to support what they're personally drawn to, and the artists need to create what inspires them... Hopefully a good balance ensues. It's not a perfect system, but art and subjectivity don't exactly foster neat, easily defined systems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChicagoFan Posted July 17, 2006 Share Posted July 17, 2006 Why foreclose the opportunity to do something fabulous just for the sake of keeping it the same? Conversely, one might ask why something should be changed just for the sake of change or because it "can be" changed. 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.