ADDRESS Greater Musical Possibilities in Marching Percussion Scott Wilkinson scott@ailiasinc.com Hello and thanks for reading this address. My intention is to offer a brief, constructive criticism of modern marching percussion, and offer some suggestions for how it could be enriched from a musical standpoint. My comments are subjective, and come from almost twenty-five years of closely observing drum corps and marching bands. I'm a professional percussionist and have studied almost every form of percussion from junk funk to Indian rhythmic structure, so my perspective comes from a relatively broad musical base. Though my comments apply to both drum corps and marching bands, I'll limit my references to drum corps, mainly because corps have such strong influence on bands. I should start by applauding the extraordinary level of technique and musicality in today's batteries and front ensembles. The demands on battery players in particular are far greater today than twenty years ago--playing difficult parts while crabbing sideways at tempos nearing 200 beats per minute is more challenging than shuffling up and down the fifty. Though we've seen only a slight increase in the difficulty of snare parts over the years, tenor and bass parts have evolved beyond the single-stroke-based patterns of the seventies. Today, tenor and bass parts are virtually a tonal extension of the snareline, with flam drags in the tenors and 32nd-note diddle patterns in the basses being common. Front ensembles today are also outstanding; four-mallet keyboard technique, an increasing number of concert percussion instruments in the pit, and creative use of ethnic and "found" instruments have all expanded the musical possibilities. The greatest weakness in modern marching percussion is endemic to the whole activity: homogenization. As in so many competitive activities, trends in drum corps tend toward whatever the most successful corps are doing. There is also possibly a misplaced belief that everyone must have the latest offerings of percussion manufacturers to be competitive. To Infinite Tension...and Beyond! Nowhere is this homogenization more evident than in the pitch range of battery instruments. For example, 1980 was an apocryphal year for tenors when the Santa Clara Vanguard fielded eight sets of quads. Four were the larger, lower-pitched quads common at the time. But the other four were smaller, high-pitched quads tuned in the range of bongos. A few years passed before "bongo quads" became the norm, but the change was profound and lasting. Fred Sanford's masterful use of eight pitches added a much-expanded midrange voice to the battery, but his example all but died in the years that followed, as everyone fielded only high-pitched tenors. The deep sonorities of the Ludwig "Power Toms" and variants like the '79 Blue Devils' Roger North tenors disappeared completely. All of a sudden, bongo quads were in, and "flub-a-dubs" (as they were derogatorily named) were out. Paralleling the evolution of tenors was a trend toward smaller, tighter, and higher-pitched snares. This trend was motivated largely by economic concerns; corps spent a small fortune on mylar heads that tore apart after a day or two under the pressure of double-hooped rims cranked so tight the rim was almost below the head. So with a sigh of financial relief, batteries embraced the free-floating kevlar head. Suddenly snares could be cranked to tensions previously unknown. Of course, this ascent in snare tension was also motivated by the belief that higher-pitched snares projected better, exposing those inverted flam-taps previously thought lost in the muck of mylar days. Not to be outdone by ever-more-cranked snares and tenors, the size of bass lines diminished until the top bass was barely larger than a snare turned sideways, and almost as tight. Where someone of lesser ability might have made the bass line in years past, today's top bass players must have the chops of any snare player. Today's result of this upward tonal shift is a top-heavy battery that lacks a true bass voice. Bass drums are solidly in the tenor range, and tenors are well into the alto and soprano ranges. Expanding The Battery's Range To limit a battery to high pitch ranges is to prevent arrangers from using all the musical voices available to them. Any arguments by arrangers that the larger drums of the past are somehow inferior, undesirable, or don't project are weak. Listen to the Blue Devils' North tenors in 1977, and you'll hear the most focused pitches of any set of tenors, clearly tuned to an inverted major triad (which happened to be in the key of the opening of "Channel One Suite!"). Or listen to Phantom Regiment's Ludwig Power Tom parts in 1979's "Malambo" and you'll hear a rich, full-bodied tenor sound that makes today's tenors sound like popcorn. The same is true for snares. Not only does mylar sound just as good (possibly better) than kevlar, it feels better to play on. Projection is not an issue; listen to any recordings from pre-kevlar days and you'll have no problem hearing the snares. Granted, mylar's relative lack of durability is still an issue, but enough pressure on the manufacturers by top corps would surely lead to a new and stronger synthetic head with the same qualities as mylar. I don't suggest that corps scrap modern drums. Rather, I suggest that arrangers take advantage of the much broader range of drum sounds and pitches available when the drums and instrumentation of earlier decades are added to what we have today. It simply doesn't make sense to use the top half of the piano--so to speak--when you've got another several octaves available below. As an example, imagine the musical potential of a battery consisting of four 10 x 14" kevlar snares, four 12 x 15" mylar snares, three lower-pitched (tenor) quads, three high-pitched (soprano) quads, and six basses, with the bottom drums being tuned below today's lowest drums. Such a battery would be capable of greater musical flexibility and expressiveness. The Diminished Presence Of Timpani After thousands of hours playing timpani in professional orchestras, I've been consistently disappointed in the diminished presence of timpani in drum corps shows. Over the years, there have been some outstanding timpanists, and I give them credit. But they remain the exception, not the rule. Among all sideline percussion instruments, timpani have the greatest potential for impact and showmanship. They are also the most difficult instrument to master. There are few teachers in the U.S. outside professional orchestral timpanists from whom players can learn the best technique. Two aspects of timpani in drum corps today could stand improvement. The first is the music: too much emphasis is placed on timpani being a melodic instrument, with seated players pedaling constantly throughout the show. The more players focus on intonation and melodic phrases, the less they focus on projection and technique. The greatest timpani parts ever written come straight out of the orchestral repertoire from composers like Beethoven, Mahler, Bartok, and John Adams. Arrangers should spend much more time listening to how these composers wrote for the instrument. They would learn that the timpani are not at their best when doubling, note-for-note, the other bass parts. They are far more effective at reinforcing musical impacts and emphasizing key chords in a rhythmic and harmonic rather than melodic way. A liability of most timpanists is that they're seated. There seems to be a notion that sitting is the standard position for playing timpani, when in fact many of the greatest timpanists of the 20th century stood when they played. Standing offers a much wider range of motion and the ability to put more of the upper body into playing technique, which in turn leads to greater projection. Regarding projection, drum corps could benefit from a technique commonly used by British orchestral timpanists. Any size timpano sounds best at the top of its range, when the head is tightest. This is why a "C" sounds better on a 29-inch drum than a 26-inch drum. The British timpanists carried this fact to its logical conclusion and stepped up the size of a standard set of four drums. Instead of the common American setup of 32", 29", 26", and 23" drums, the Brits use 32", 32", 29" and 26". All pitches are played on tighter heads, which results in a much more focused pitch center and better articulation with less "thud." A Case For The Return of Marching Timpani The marching timp lines of the seventies are often the butt of uninformed jokes in today's drum corps world. But many of the parts played by the best marching timp lines were superior to most grounded timpani parts heard today. Anything that can be done with a bass line, rhythmically speaking, could be done with a timp line. And with separate players tuning their own drums, marching timp lines played better melodic parts than most grounded players. Perhaps the finest example of a marching timp line was Phantom Regiment's line in 1979. If you study the parts they played, you'll realize that they were every bit as complex as any of today's parts, flawlessly in tune, and far more prominent in the overall ensemble. Rhythmic articulation was often superior in marching lines because, again, of the separation of notes. I'm not advocating the elimination of grounded concert timpani. Like my comments on the battery above, I'm suggesting that marching timpani provide a broader range of musical and visual possibilities, and should not be automatically ruled out by arrangers. Marching timpani were visually exciting to watch, and are one of those traditional elements that are wholly unique to drum corps and marching bands. Amplification of Mallet Instruments Anything electric in drum corps is controversial. And for years I would have shouted down anyone who dared suggest such a thing. But I've come to accept a simple fact that seems lost on many arrangers: mallet percussion instruments can't compete with battery instruments and hornlines. Today's top-level front ensembles represent an enormous capital expense--upwards of $50,000, that few but the biggest corps and bands can afford. (Or get for free, as the case may be.) Furthermore, the size of front ensembles has grown to where several of each instrument is the norm. But in spite of doubled instruments and strong players, mallets remain solidly in the category of "icing on the cake." Though they play an integral musical role in many shows, the pit's finest moments are limited to times when the horns and battery aren't playing (or are playing very softly). As soon as things get loud, it's time to leave the keys and move to gongs, cymbals and bass drums. Careful amplification of the mallet instruments would not only make it possible for keyboard players to hold their own in the ensemble balance against horns and drums, but it would also level the playing field for corps and bands with smaller budgets and fewer players. A good amplifier costs far less than a concert grand marimba. I don't doubt that many people reading this are probably rolling their eyes and cringing at my suggestion, but the overall musical sound of corps and bands would become richer if mallet instruments had a stronger presence. Greater Use Of World Rhythms In the seventies and early eighties, the use of Scottish pipe band rhythms in battery arrangements was frequent, particularly by corps like the Kilties and the 27th Lancers. Granted, these rhythms fit those corps' styles, but it was a pleasure and thrill to hear a snareline tapping out dotted-sixteenth-32nd-note rhythms with precision. These rhythms are absent from today's arrangements. Indian rhythmic structure often features groups of five, seven and nine. The extended improvisations of a master tabla player are sometimes likened to a coin spinning on a table, gradually accelerating, then coming to a halt directly on the beat. The internal clock of the player keeps ticking regularly. Even though his hands may wander far from the beat, the player is constantly aware of the relationship of the beat to his improvisations. Some corps have dabbled in such advanced rhythms, but they've only scratched the surface. African percussion is often intensely polyrhythmic, with thick, textured layers of duple, triple, and quintuple rhythms all juxtaposed against one another to create an incredibly living, pulsating effect. Much African percussion also places the accented notes anywhere but the "downbeat," creating a flowing sound where barlines are almost nonexistent, and the music is free from symmetrical constraints. Again, many corps have played with individual African rhythms and instruments, but most arrangers have avoided complex polyrhythmic structures in a full ensemble. American percussionists, like most rock-and-roll drumset players, are locked into a simple duple or triple-meter mindset. I've seen this many times when I asked DCI snare players to repeat a complex polyrhythmic pattern and they were incapable of doing anything outside the typical, rudimental framework. Within that framework, drum corps players reign supreme. But send them into uncharted rhythmic waters, and their abilities diminish. I recognize that corps must be able to march to the rhythms on the field, so I'm not suggesting that conventional meters be thrown out entirely. Rather, I believe arrangers should push the rhythmic envelope more than they're currently doing, and players should be challenged to internalize rhythms unknown to their experience. A beneficial side effect of playing more complex rhythms is that it's the best way there is to fine tune a musician's internal clock, especially when playing conventional duple or triple rhythms. There are countless examples I could mention of the kind of rhythmic exploration that would be great to see in drum corps. But one example stands out, a work that many concert percussionists are familiar with: John Cage's "Third Construction." I recommend that all battery arrangers find a copy of the music to this masterpiece and study its rhythms. I guarantee it'll open new horizons for anyone interested. Push The Envelope...And Be Different! There are those who believe that drum corps is a traditional, well-defined musical idiom, and that arrangers should not stray from the conventional path. I'm all in favor of a big snarelines ripping out rudimental parts in flawless precision. In fact, I'm all in favor of everything that is being done today. My comments in this address are a plea to arrangers to take the road less traveled. To push the envelope in every way, and to explore the *full* range of percussive sounds and instrumentation that we've seen over the past thirty years, and not be limited to just what is happening today. Listen to Indian music. Listen to Indonesian gamelan music. Listen to minimalist composers like Reich and Riley, innovative composers like Charles Ives and Edgar Varese. Open your ears to everything that is happening in the world, and not just what is on the football field. I also strongly urge arrangers everywhere to be unique, original, innovative...and most importantly, be different from everyone else. Forget what the other corps are doing, and focus instead on how you can express new musical ideas in ways that give audiences the thrill of the exotic, and give them a way to set you apart from the rest of the competition. Adopt a mindset where you find a way to constantly say something new, rather than say the same thing a hundred different ways. No matter what you do, if you do it at the same extraordinarily high level of execution as anything else, the judges and audiences will respond positively. The only thing more rewarding than a passionate, technically brilliant performance is a brilliant performance unlike anything you've ever seen before.