prodigal bari Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 I have been thinking about this for awhile... Which is dangerous... :sshh: COULD the activity be reaching the physical limit as to what can be done, given the present limitations in the rules? Either creatively or at the physical limits of instrumentation/visual prop and/or the human body...it is becoming more difficult to come up with new and fresh ideas EVEN for the present makeup of a potentially maxed-out corps...everything presently thinkable could have been done; and we have seen a few things tried that are physically impossible to do with excellence. This lust to change the rules is part of the tension to find new ground; and although I would not agree with changes that would alter the character of what we have at this time, the activity could hit the wall to the point that either things are added or it will stagnate. It is nice to have a time machine at times to look back at our past (and I think in the band activity Ohio State's Script Ohio is a shining example of the past done incredibly well) but it is human nature to progress. DC will need to expand and/or metaporphize from time to time to stay fresh and cutting-edge; and it is within the show designers to give the signal when change needs to occur...I just do not think we are all the way there yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 Because the items that took hold made sense economically and in performance quality in general. good catch with in general, cause reading Hops blog, he threw thousands at a never ending problem with amps Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburstall Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 I have been thinking about this for awhile...Which is dangerous... :sshh: COULD the activity be reaching the physical limit as to what can be done, given the present limitations in the rules? Either creatively or at the physical limits of instrumentation/visual prop and/or the human body...it is becoming more difficult to come up with new and fresh ideas EVEN for the present makeup of a potentially maxed-out corps...everything presently thinkable could have been done; and we have seen a few things tried that are physically impossible to do with excellence. This lust to change the rules is part of the tension to find new ground; and although I would not agree with changes that would alter the character of what we have at this time, the activity could hit the wall to the point that either things are added or it will stagnate. It is nice to have a time machine at times to look back at our past (and I think in the band activity Ohio State's Script Ohio is a shining example of the past done incredibly well) but it is human nature to progress. DC will need to expand and/or metaporphize from time to time to stay fresh and cutting-edge; and it is within the show designers to give the signal when change needs to occur...I just do not think we are all the way there yet. I think you're talking about change for the sake of change. To date, I haven't seen any financial backing for any of the changes. It's no different than the US Congress passing a law without giving any cost estimates and we, the tax payer, have to pay for it all. Most of these rules are the same way. Even though they will list "no cost to....", it will come down to higher performance fees which will be passed down to us, the consumer, with either higher ticket prices OR no longer any show. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 we keep hearing designers are stagnant creatively without these toys. ever think maybe then it's time for new designers? if these guys are so burnt out without drastically altering the rules, maybe we need fresh faces that arent? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 we keep hearing designers are stagnant creatively without these toys. I have yet to see, outside of a few folks like you, any mention of the designers being 'stagnant'. ever think maybe then it's time for new designers? if these guys are so burnt out without drastically altering the rules, maybe we need fresh faces that arent? Wht drastic alteration? None of the proposals is all that drastic. And..I doubt many if any will pass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 Hop has used that word as well as the usual "they are handcuffed" mantras when he has proposed his new rules Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TastyWaves Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 Good topic! Personally I think change is a good thing. Not neccesarily "Change for the sake of change", but i also dont care for laziness, complacency, and constant regurgitation of ideas under the guise of "Tradition". In terms of the proposals and additions over the years, i think they are like anything else on the field. Ive seen good use of it, and some poor use of it. Anything i see on the field, i just personally want to see well executed, and relevant to the production. Do I like singing through a mic in show? Sure. if its done well, and matters to the show. Just like i Snare features IF they are clean and meaningful. Not just a random flash of notes for the sake of notes. And do i like Amped pits? sure. if they are balanced, and enhance the program. Just like i like hornlines to be balanced. I dont think that wanting to bring in new idioms is an indictment on peoples creativity. In fact i think that wanting to open things up (again, when used properly) is an example of creativity. Can a great show still be made with 135 members and no AMps? absolutely. But can a different great show be made with the additions of some new "ingredients"? I (personally) believe it can. I dont believe (personally) that any of the proposals are a blanket "good" or "Bad". I think that should one or any of these proposals pass, some corps will do great, wonderful and amazing things with them, and others will #### the proverbial bed with them. When a bad show happens, some people will blame the idea... but oh well. thats how some people are. Which is silly becasue i cant count how many AWFUL shows ive seen performed with G bugles. It wasnt the idea of a G bugle that made it suck. Ive seen AWFUL quad lines. It wasnt the 6th drum that make them play bad or made the author write a bad book. I think if none of these proposals go through, DCI will have some great shows and some bad shows this summer. I think if ALL of the proposals pass, DCI will have some great shows and some bad shows this summer. Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted January 12, 2007 Author Share Posted January 12, 2007 I have been thinking about this for awhile...Which is dangerous... :sshh: COULD the activity be reaching the physical limit as to what can be done, given the present limitations in the rules? Either creatively or at the physical limits of instrumentation/visual prop and/or the human body...it is becoming more difficult to come up with new and fresh ideas EVEN for the present makeup of a potentially maxed-out corps...everything presently thinkable could have been done; and we have seen a few things tried that are physically impossible to do with excellence. Interesting as while back there was a thread about corps hitting the limit of show complexity. Only parts I remember are number of sets going up to a possible max point and corps having incomplete shows at start of year. Question was can shows get more complex within the amount of time corps have to learn them. Yeah Baritones thinking is dangerous. :P 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.