Amps: Where do we go from here?

[SF2K4]

Here's my question... if this trend of innovation continues into the first choice, and BOA following suit (or leading the way, depending on your view), where on earth am I going to get to see brass, percussion, and guard perform? You could say DCA, but I've heard they're thinking of allowings amps in as well... I'm all for innovation in some regards, but... we're breeding a new activity. I know, it's been said a lot and people have disagreed a lot, but we are. I come to drum corps not to see a good show... I mean I do, but I can see a good "show" in a lot of places... drum corps, marching band, Broadway, etc. ... I come to drum corps to see brass, percussion, and guard put on a show. Once that's gone, that medium for entertainment is as well. And then I'm left with nothing to fulfill that medium. :(

[ShortAndFast]

The idea that 22 of 23 D1 corps are using amps means they accept the rules as they are is wrong. It just means they are trying to keep up with the Jones's. My guess is if asked, most directors would have no problem going back to the 2003 rules. There is absolutely nothing to lose by doing that.

As far as improving the various technical issues around amplfication, that would cost more money and time than any corps is willing to pay. I imagine even Hoppy would back me on that after what he and the Cadets have gone through this year.

Well, nobody puts a gun to the head of a corps director and makes them amplify their pit. Amps appear nowhere on the judging sheets. You're not penalized in any way for not using them. So why would a corps use them unless they felt that the amps enhanced their show?

When I saw Pioneer with speakers earlier this year, I indeed felt that they were just trying to keep up with the other corps - they have plenty of issues they need to address before mic'ing their marimbas! But for the most part, amped pits have been used quite well by percussion writers these last three years. I'll stand on my original assertion: corps directors are satisfied with the status quo on amps, which means DCI is satisfied with the status quo. Can you point to any statement to the contrary by any D1 director?

[Jeff Ream]

no director will speak out, but Feidler did say here on DCP you cant ask him( or any other director) to compete with one arm tied behind their backs.

[LSU GRAD 82]

Amps are cool. Narration to me is cheesy, if you need to explain it to me or use it to advance a storyline than I still smell cheese. Amped singing belongs in choral classrooms, not on the football field.

Hey Gator. I doubt if many people here care about Philip Fulmer eating donuts. That belongs on a college football message board.

[NIGHTFLY3000]

Well, nobody puts a gun to the head of a corps director and makes them amplify their pit. Amps appear nowhere on the judging sheets. You're not penalized in any way for not using them. So why would a corps use them unless they felt that the amps enhanced their show?

When I saw Pioneer with speakers earlier this year, I indeed felt that they were just trying to keep up with the other corps - they have plenty of issues they need to address before mic'ing their marimbas! But for the most part, amped pits have been used quite well by percussion writers these last three years. I'll stand on my original assertion: corps directors are satisfied with the status quo on amps, which means DCI is satisfied with the status quo. Can you point to any statement to the contrary by any D1 director?

I couldn't disagree more. Once you put a tool in the tool box, you have to see how it works. I defy anyone to resist that temptation. Even if you dislike the tool ala Cavies, you would be doing a diservice to your corps not to try it. Using the tool does not imply support for the tool being allowed. It just means you acknowledge what the rules are.

As far as not being penalized for not using using amps, I would love to know if that's how Phantom and Bluecoats felt in 2004, since they remained acoustic that year, but now they are amped. Does it enhance their show, or do they just need to keep up? For the record, I think BLOOOOO had the loudest pit that year, maybe ever. Even Cavies performed their 2004 finals encore sans amps!

If you look at corps that went to the edge of amp usage (BD, Carolina Crown) they have stepped back from that edge. Why?

Not because the designers didn't want to go there again, but maybe because the corps saw their financial and member support erode during that time and now they are trying to right the ship by giving the people what they want. I suspect the Cadets will have a more difficult time recruiting top members after this year's show, and we will see a more traditional show from them next year.

Do amps really make a drum corps show better, or just different? Someone should try a year without them. How about the Cadets? Now that would be edgy! I don't think they'd miss them!

[PR_ducky]

I have always been a hater of amps in corps, but the regional in Atlanta this weekend changed my mind.

The pits that were not ampd, or at least properly so, were just not heard.

Corps like Regiment that used the amps only to amplify the pit, made excellent use.

The corps using them as an integral part of their show, I still can't stand that.

I am sure it will only take one of those corps amps flaking out DCI week to convince them all its a bad idea.

[ShortAndFast]

I couldn't disagree more. Once you put a tool in the tool box, you have to see how it works. I defy anyone to resist that temptation. Even if you dislike the tool ala Cavies, you would be doing a diservice to your corps not to try it. Using the tool does not imply support for the tool being allowed. It just means you acknowledge what the rules are.

As far as not being penalized for not using using amps, I would love to know if that's how Phantom and Bluecoats felt in 2004, since they remained acoustic that year, but now they are amped. Does it enhance their show, or do they just need to keep up? For the record, I think BLOOOOO had the loudest pit that year, maybe ever. Even Cavies performed their 2004 finals encore sans amps!

If you look at corps that went to the edge of amp usage (BD, Carolina Crown) they have stepped back from that edge. Why?

Not because the designers didn't want to go there again, but maybe because the corps saw their financial and member support erode during that time and now they are trying to right the ship by giving the people what they want. I suspect the Cadets will have a more difficult time recruiting top members after this year's show, and we will see a more traditional show from them next year.

Do amps really make a drum corps show better, or just different? Someone should try a year without them. How about the Cadets? Now that would be edgy! I don't think they'd miss them!

It's funny that you mention Phantom and Bluecoats. I don't think they were hurt by not using amps in 2004 - I agree with the finals placement of both corps. But I would credit those two with some of the most effective uses of amps to date (PR's tapdancing, 'Coats' chanting) in 2005. When they sat down to design 2006, they probably concluded that the amps improved their product last year and they should use them again. As long as corps directors feel that way, they're not going to vote to change the rules.

Conversely Boston and Crown did go overboard in 2004, arguably to the detriment of their product, and both have scaled their use of amps back considerably since then. But neither has stopped doing basic amplification of the pit. Maybe their designers are "once burned, twice shy" or maybe they just haven't seen good opportunities to use it in the last two years. But again, it's hard to see either corps voting against the amp rules that enabled their 2004 productions.

And then there's the Cavaliers. You simply will not convince me that Jeff Fiedler is politically bullied into doing anything by DCI. His corps have absolutely dominated the activity this decade. Everyone is falling over themselves to copy the Cavies' show design techniques. The activity is following Jeff's lead, not the the other way around. If he's using amps, it's because the Cavies want them in their shows, end of story.

I'm not arguing what DCI should or should not do here, but (in the spirit of the original poll) I'm predicting that DCI will not change the amp rules until there exist a significant number of corps' directors who will vote against them. Of the six corps you mentioned in your reply, none of them seem likely to vote against the amp rules as they now stand.

[Tekneek]

I was totally against amps until DCI Atlanta. I do think it allows the pit instruments to sound better than ever. I do think they should ban the use of amplification for any sort of vocal use. If you can't project your speaking or singing part without amplification, it shouldn't be in the show. This isn't show choir, so it isn't about making the best presentation for vocals and never should be.

I don't agree that corps can simply choose to use/not use amplification now. There is no doubt in my mind that a corps without them would suffer a lower percussion score, with all other things equal. If they are playing with the same technique as an amped pit, they won't hear it in the box and they will be hit. If they are pounding on them, like the pre-amp days, they will get hurt on technique compared to the other corps. This was my first show with amplification, so maybe I am wrong and history can already show that my claim is wrong. If that is so, I welcome someone demonstrating it to me. It seemed impossible, last Saturday night, for any such thing to happen. The difference between the two was demonstrated clearly when CorpsVets and Jubal went on, neither of which were amped.

Edited August 1, 2006 by Tekneek