2023 DCI Rules Proposals

2023 Drum Corps International Rules Change Proposals DCI Rules Change Process Overview.........................................................2 1. Addition of “Brass Ensemble” Judge at Regionals and Championships; Removal of Additional “Music Analysis” Judge.........................................5 2. Competition Times....................................................................................8 3. Change the Captions “General Effect 1” and “General Effect 2” to “General Effect Music” and “General Effect Visual”................................ 11 4. Pacing and Evaluation............................................................................14 5. Brass Amplification Parameters.............................................................18 6. Brass Pre-Recorded/Sampling Electronics Management......................22

13 DRUM CORPS INTERNATIONAL RULES CHANGE PROCESS OVERALL GUIDELINES The formalized Rules Proposal form, a sample of which can be found in this document, is the ONLY tool of choice for proposals to change the rules. The discussion of competitive rules and changes to those rules will occur every other year to create a one-year of change/learning and one-year of stability/mastery cycle. Consequently, every other year, a Rules Congress would convene. The DCI Membership approved an exception to hold a \"Rules Congress\" in 2019. It would include the Artistry & Competition Steering Committee (ACSC) and its advisors, instructor representatives, judge liaisons, the Judge Administrator, the Director ,of Competition, and the Directors of the units. There would be a full instructor caucus, caption caucus, and representative voting occurring in caucus to advise directors on potential changes. New rules' proposals would be submitted to the Director of Competition/ACSC by October 15th prior to Congress, using the ACSC to sort and edit the proposals. Some proposals will go directly to the CEO, who will forward appropriately to voting members because they do NOT require input from the instructional community. Typically and generally, the rules proposals that move forward through the ACSC will concern judging sheets, systems, personnel and judging systems. Other proposals will be returned to their authors for clarification or for additional material. And others will be passed to members of the judging community for advice on application and training, prior to the Rules Congress caucus discussions. The ACSC will assemble, publish, and distribute the proposals and any ancillary information in a timely fashion, allowing all potential attendees the ability !Q_have discussion and thought on each proposal. In addition, there may be enrichment sessions offered at the Rules Congress, sponsored by the ACSC, featuring experts conversant in topics apropos our activity and time. In those years in which there is no Rules Congress, there may be opportunities for interdisciplinary meetings, which might combine judges and instructors interactively, or might be used to further judge training concurrently with the annual January Directors' meetings. 1.1 Any instructional member or corps director of an active drum corps (must have competed in a DCI sanctioned show) the previous summer, or an active judge of DCI may submit a rules proposal on his/her own behalf or on behalf of another. 1.2 The sponsoring corps Director or the appropriate Judge Liaison, Judge Administrator, or the Director of Competition will sign the completed (and required) Rules Proposal Form.

14 1.3 Rules changes may be submitted and reviewed only in October prior to the Rules Congress, scheduled for every other year as stated above. Prior to an Instructor caucus vote, or recommendation to the Voting Members, the proposer may augment, change or modify the proposal, or allow modification from the floor. If after a vote, a proposal is defeated at the instructor caucus, that rule cannot be resubmitted for another two-year cycle. It cannot go to the Voting Members meeting without the approval of the instructor caucus. 1.4 Those rules change proposals - once passed by the Instructors' Caucus and the Voting Members - which require field trials and judging system modifications or which have an impact on judging systems and judging application or rules shall be referred to the ACSC for discussion of trial and possible implementation. After any necessary trials, the proposal would then be voted upon by the ACSC. The Director of Competition or the Judge Administrator shall make a full report to the CEO at the conclusion of any such field trials. The CEO and/or the Director of Competition may request another vote by the voting membership of the Directors prior to implementation. The Timetable for a Rules Change 2.1 Octobe1r5prior to the Rules Congress: This is the deadline for submitting Rules Change Proposals. The Director of Competition will receive ALL proposals, review them for completeness and prepare them for distribution to the ACSC members. Any proposals that are not directly related to judging, judging systems, systems, judging personnel, and judging philosophy move to the CEO. The CEO guides and directs those proposals as necessary. Incomplete proposals are returned to the author or signatory without any further review. 2.2 Octobe1r5:The Director of Competition, or at his direction, The Judge Administrator, will contact various DCI personnel for advice on financial impact, marketing, and the potential impact for promoters/sponsorsof DCI events. 2.3 Noyembe1r5:The ACSC discusses and submits, through the Director of Competition or the Judge Administrator, a written opinion of the various proposals (including a suggested implementation time line). The CEO receives the opinion of the ACSC and discusses the opinion with appropriate DCI personnel. 2.4 Decembe1r: All complete proposals and attachments (pertinent to judging and systems) to be mailed, electronically delivered, or posted to the ACSC members by the Director of Competition or Judge Administrator for review. 2.5 Decembe8r:The ACSC compiles opinions on the proposals for potential impact to the judges and judging system, logistics at shows and for sponsors, operational changes for the DCI office and a recommended time frame/implementation plan. Rules proposals may be rejected by the ACSC on the basis of insufficient data/researchor lack of clarity/definitionto the proposal or results of trials. 2.6 Decembe1r5: All reviewed proposals to be distributed to the judges, corps, directors and instructionalstaff members for their review, prior to the Rules Congress Process.

15 DC/ RULES CONGRESS PROCESS 3.1 At the Rules Congress, the ACSC will be responsible for leading the discussion, debate, and voting in the caption caucus meetings prior to the advancement to the full instructor caucus. Each drum corps, in attendance, that competed in the previous summer's DCI tour will have one vote per caption in the caucus meeting. 3.2 The ACSC will be responsible for leading the discussion, debate, and voting in the full instructor caucus. At this final meeting of the Congress a vote will be taken. Each DCI World Class member corps and each DCI Open Class Grand Finalist Corps may cast one vote. A simp(emaiorityof thoseauafi(iemd emberpsresenatndypt;nqis necessacinvPC®c thattheprgpgsamf0veto theBoard0t Directors, 3.3 At the Board of Directors meeting, the ACSC, through the Director of Competition and/or the Judge Administrator, under the direction of the Chair, will be responsible for leading the discussion, debate, and voting. Votes from the caption caucus meetings, the full instructor caucus, all attachments from DCI Committees, and final rule proposals will be availablefor the Board of Directors. 3.4 Those proposals receiving a favorable majority vote of the Board of Directors will be scheduled for implementation based upon the recommended time frame/process as previously determined by the Rules Committee. Once again, a rule is passed by a simplemaioritoyfthosequalifiedmembers presenatndypUna

Proposal: Addition of “Brass Ensemble” Judge at Regionals and Championships; Removal of Additional “Music Analysis” Judge Submitted by: Michael Martin (Carolina Crown)

2023 Rules Proposal: ONE Title of Proposed Change: Addition of “Brass Ensemble” judge at Regionals and Championships; removal of additional “Music Analysis” judge. Description: This rule would remove the second Music Analysis judge and add one upstairs “Ensemble” judge to the panels at all Regionals (San Antonio, Atlanta, Allentown) and all three days of competition in Indianapolis for DCI Championships. This judge’s sole focus would be the holistic brass ensemble from the same perspective as the GE and MA judges. This judge’s numbers would exist on a 20-point scale, 10 points for content and 10 points for achievement, and would be averaged with the field brass and field percussion judges’ numbers for an overall “brass” number. This judge would be granted purview over dynamic matching and shaping, balance, blend, intonation, and tone, similar to the field brass sheet, but would ALSO include purview over brass ensemble alignment, musical inflection, orchestration (texture, tessitura, harmonic and melodic variety) and the quality and quantity of amplification (solos, small ensembles, full ensemble). If passed, it is recommended that the sole MA judge for these shows be a person with a percussion background. Purpose: The purpose of this rule would be to more accurately and thoroughly evaluate the brass ensemble, instead of our current practice of evaluating and ranking the caption from the limited perspective of the front sideline, where adequate sampling of the entire ensemble is impossible. This rule would also allow for acknowledgement, evaluation, and adjudication of the fidelity of how/when/why groups amplify their brass sections. So much of what is designed and taught to be heard upstairs and by the audience passes over the head of any single field judge, including amplified/ manipulated solos and small ensembles, loops, and myriad effects. While these are often acknowledged by judges in other captions, there are many times that the opportunity for evaluation and feedback by a second set of ears for the largest caption in each group are missed because of the lack of such a judge. Highlighting and evaluating, however subjectively, the differences in acoustic and amplified/enhanced sound for the purposes of volume is of particular concern to everyone. This would serve as a very specific avenue by which instructors and designers might have open and honest dialogue with the judging community about the quality and quantity of amplification practices as they pertain to the brass choir and would provide a standardized adjudicational and educational guardrail on our road to more sophisticated productions without imposing a hindrance on creativity. 1

2023 Rules Proposal: ONE Educational Impact: This rule would provide staffs and students with the important perspective of an “upstairs” judge whose only focus is their caption. Creative Impact: N/A Fiscal Impact: No fiscal impact, as this judge would replace the second MA judge. Audience Impact: Little to no impact. However, this could increase the accessibility of recap understanding for the average fan. Show Promoter Impact: N/A Logistics Impact: This rule would require the creation of one new sheet detailing the criteria for the new sub-caption. Judging Impact: This rule would require specific, but not extensive, training as to the language used on one new sheet. This rule would not impact the current field judges in any way; indeed, it is very possible (and even likely) that the two numbers are sometimes wildly different, the mitigation of which is the average. This adds no new points to the Overall Music Caption. It is recommended that the MA judge at these shows be a percussionist or a judge with a percussion background. Michael Martin Music Design Consultant, Carolina Crown 2

Proposal: Competition Times Submitted by: Chris Komnick, David Lofy, Nick Monzi, Jason Robb (Madison Scouts)

2023 Rules Proposal: TWO Title of Proposed Change: Competition Times Description: All World/Open Class corps shall be in competition with its complete competing personnel for not less than 8 minute or more than 10 minutes. All World/Open Class corps will be scheduled to compete at fifteen (15) minute intervals. Adjudication will begin/end as queued by corps personnel and a corps must fully enter/exit the field within the 15 minute interval. Purpose: This purpose of the rule is to decrease the show length for all corps and thus, their subsequent preparation time, student’s physical exertion, and potential costs. As well, to decrease the overall time requirement of a DCI event and create better consistency of show planning that almost always includes a mix of World and Open Class units. Educational Impact: The competitive drum corps activity has rapidly escalated the performance requirements of its students. Multiple responsibilities of performance include both increased and extended physical and mental exertion to advance and perfect the show routine. Reducing the timed requirements of a performance reduces the physical and mental demands on the performer. It also provides an opportunity for a corps to reduce its rehearsal time to minimize the negative physical/mental aspects of the activity while still maintaining the highest level of excellence. Creative Impact: The change in performance timing is a natural creative constraint that can and should be defined by the activity based on the current conditions of the environment. The trend in almost all forms of entertainment and sport are to deliver the audience a comparable product in less time. When looking at the arc of the entire DCI event, we should be taking these trends into consideration. It is possible to creatively design a show that delivers an impactful and emotional result in less time. In doing so, the activity benefits in multiple ways. Fiscal Impact: A decreased show length will require less preparation to perfect and it is reasonable to assume there would be financial benefit experienced by the corps directly. 1

2023 Rules Proposal: TWO Audience Impact: Audience trends are towards shorter engagement with their artforms and sporting events. This is a response to that by shortening both the single performance of a corps and the overall timing of a full DCI event. Show Promoter Impact: By decreasing show length, a show promoter has the opportunity to produce an event that is more aligned with today’s entertainment standards. Two hours is a sweet spot for movies/plays and 3 hours for sporting events and concerts. Most midweek DCI shows are at or beyond 3 hours and the large weekend events are considerably longer. This reduction in time helps ease some of the challenges that show promoters face with facility rentals, noise ordinances, nearby neighborhoods, and shows running beyond 9 p.m. Logistics Impact: Drum corps could potentially find that they have more time in their rehearsal day to apply differently. Shorter show lengths can improve post and pre show travel situations. Compressing the total event length could help in facility rentals, allow for later start times to accommodate for heat (a growing issue), and provide more flexibility in the events of inclement weather. Over the course of a full-day regional event, over an hour can be removed from the schedule with this change. Judging Impact: There is potential benefit for judges having to adjudicate less time at an event. If the entire activity agrees to reduce the time of performance equally, then the judging community will be able to adjust equitably on how the scoring performance criteria are met. Submitted By: Chris Komnick, David Lofy, Nick Monzi, Jason Robb 2

Proposal: Change the Captions “General Effect 1” and “General Effect 2” to “General Effect Music” and “General Effect Visual” Submitted by: Michael Martin (Carolina Crown)

2023 Rules Proposal: THREE Title of Proposed Change: Change the captions “General Effect 1” and “General Effect 2” to “General Effect Music” and “General Effect Visual”. Description: This rule would rename and redefine the adjudication criteria for the two General Effect captions to “General Effect Music” and “General Effect Visual”. Instead of a broader lens that allows for acknowledgement and even evaluation of the visual and musical side of a production for both GE judges, regardless of professional background, the two GE judges (four at regionals and championships), would respectively be asked to evaluate Music only and Visual only (two judges for each at regionals and championships). Yes, as it used to be. The “old sheets” could indeed be used, but perhaps more productively could be referenced in creating new sheets for GE Visual and GE Music. Purpose: The purpose of this rule is to, slightly but importantly, narrow the scope and responsibility of the effect judges, so that strengths and weaknesses more specific to the Visual and/or Music side are given more consideration. Our shows are indeed more organically *both* Visually and Musically inspired and designed, but that does not necessarily mean that they should be *evaluated* as organically. For the purposes of ranking and rating, the judges’ purviews should be more specific. In exhibition, or any other non-competitive sphere, less specific commentary and evaluation is not as necessary as it is in a competitive environment. Educational Impact: This rule would provide staffs with more efficient and focused feedback from experts in their respective broader communities (Visual and Music), particularly in critique. Creative Impact: N/A Fiscal Impact: N/A Audience Impact: Little to no impact. However, this could increase the accessibility of recap understanding for the average fan. 1

2023 Rules Proposal: THREE Show Promoter Impact: N/A Logistics Impact: This rule would require the redesign and redefinition of the two General Effect sheets as well as potential new training (or retraining) for the redefined criteria. Judging Impact: Very little, if any, impact is foreseen. It is the hope that this rule would make judges’ lives easier in the effect captions. Michael Martin Music Design Consultant, Carolina Crown 2

Proposal: Pacing of Evaluation Submitted by: Nick Monzi, Chris Komnick, David Lofy, Jason Robb (Madison Scouts)

2023 Rules Proposal: FOUR Title of Proposed Change: Pacing of Evaluation Description: We propose to introduce a 10-day exhibition period at the beginning of the 2023 DCI Tour, providing performers an opportunity to transition into the competitive season with a series of non-scored performances. As proposed, all performances through Thursday, July 6, 2023 would receive verbal feedback from adjudicators. No scores would be recorded, privately or publicly, for these performances. The recording and publication of scores would begin with shows on Friday, July 7, 2023. Purpose: We believe that the following conditions can be enhanced by the adoption of this system: • ● With groups starting their public performances on different dates, this system normalizes the start of adjudication for a significant majority of corps. Any perceived or actual benefit of receiving scores earlier or later than other groups is largely neutralized. • ● Today’s average DCI performer spends just 1.2 years in the activity. As such, a greater percentage of our students are experiencing their first public performances during the first week(s) of the season. Hosting a set of non-scored shows provides these performers with an opportunity to stabilize their personal performances without the added pressure of public adjudication. • ● Given that early season commentary is often weighted towards content and design, creative teams are provided with a range of opinions on their work product in conjunction with the start of adjudication. The proposed buffer affords extra time to parse out internally and externally observed trends before fully diving into the competitive season. • ● Early season shows often feature adjudicators with a wider range of judging experience. The implementation of this system provides an onboarding window for judges who are stepping into non-trial DCI adjudication for the first time. In summary, the proposed change to the adjudication structure creates the following opportunities by area of interest: Educational Impact: The proposal holds space for students to focus the entirety of their early-season performance efforts on feedback from their staff and self-evaluation. As our collective student body becomes statistically less experienced, this provides an important opportunity for performers to adjust to the frequency and intensity of DCI’s competitive environment. Given the unavoidable influence that social media and public commentary 1

2023 Rules Proposal: FOUR have on our current students, the proposed window facilitates an important cognitive shift from the relatively isolated nature of our spring training environments to the competitive demands of touring. Creative Impact: The proposal provides a competitive buffer, during which creative teams can implement and observe their work prior to public adjudication. Designers (and educators) will be afforded space to parse out trends in commentary from the initial set(s) of adjudicators, prior to reconciling how those observations will impact the competitive results of their product. This may also allow for a degree of creative risk-taking, as there will be no immediate competitive implication for the nuances of a show’s design. Fiscal Impact: As described, there is limited fiscal impact from this proposal. We have regularly observed that audiences at early-season shows appear to be most focused on seeing the corps perform for the first time and less focused on competitive results. As an example, these are the remnants of a sold-out crowd at the start of score announcements during the first weeks of the 2022 tour: Additionally, a marketing opportunity may exist for DCI to promote both the launch of the tour and the launch of competitive shows at two separate points in the early-season calendar. Logistics Impact: There is limited logistical impact for shows. 2

2023 Rules Proposal: FOUR Judging Impact: This proposal would remove the rank and rating responsibility from the first ~10 days of shows, allowing judges to focus solely on providing transparent, high quality commentary and qualitative feedback in critique. Submitted By: Nick Monzi, Chris Komnick, David Lofy, Jason Robb 3

Proposal: Brass Amplification Parameters Submitted by: Jason Robb (Madison Scouts), Chris Komnick (Madison Scouts), Jim Coates (Carolina Crown), Michael Klesch (Carolina Crown), Monte Mast (The Cavaliers), David Starnes (The Cavaliers)

2023 Rules Proposal: FIVE Title of Proposed Change: Brass Amplification Parameters Description: This rule would stipulate that short-range personal microphones cannot be used for ensemble reinforcement of the brass line (i.e., reinforcement of tutti musical lines). In essence, such microphones would only be used to amplify musical content that is soloistic or soli-istic in nature. This proposal would not place limits on the number of performers that may perform such content at one time or through the duration of that ensemble’s performance. Amplified solo content should not reinforce non-amplified ensemble content. Purpose: This rule change would still allow for the amplification of soloists and small groups (with no limitations on the number of soloists that can be amplified simultaneously). Still, it would prohibit a group from being able to amplify tutti members of the brass ensemble with the intent of communicating an ensemble moment with synthetic brass support. This would preserve the educational and competitive intent of brass performance as it relates to ensemble contribution and general effect. Additionally, if tutti ensemble electronic enhancement and manipulation as described heretofore were appropriate, an additional issue is the cost-prohibitive nature of this type of excessive individual amplification, making this approach either an impossibility or one that prices out more student participants than the activity already prices out at a time when one of DCI’s goals is to provide more, not less, access to the activity. Educational Impact: The use of electronic enhancements, amplification, and/or sound manipulation of individually mic-ed performers during tutti ensemble playing can and has resulted in false impressions of what members are doing, contributing, and achieving during tutti ensemble performance. If ensembles can be compared, judged, and scored for placements and awards while utilizing technology that blurs inadequacies, masks ensemble deficiencies, or imbues member performance with a professional sound enhancement that artificially alters performance and perceived achievement (i.e. resonance, projection, dynamics, blend, balance, etc.), the integrity of the entire activity is compromised from an educational, competitive, and ethical standpoint. Crossing the line between actual member performance/achievement and that which is created artificially cannot be defended when measurable standards of assessment and evaluation are being used to judge brass ensemble performance. 1

2023 Rules Proposal: FIVE Furthermore, without the ability to increase volume and/or artificially enhance performance achievement via individual member amplification, instructors (including current and future band directors) and students will continue to learn how to produce resonance outdoors at the uppermost dynamics, placing the focus on sound teaching through the pedagogy of breath control, aperture development, stamina, endurance, tone production, and intonation - in short, keeping the focus on the student performers who are striving for a unified acoustic ensemble that is genuine and not artificially enhanced. This honest approach protects the level playing ield that DCI has historically fostered and promoted, and it ensures that students leave our corps as musically educated people who are able to rely on their own abilities to strive and accomplish and who value the act of doing so, understanding the value of true musical achievement modeled through the approach of those that instruct them and DCI, as an organization. Creative Impact: This rule would place creative limits on the design teams of world-class units in staging areas and the inability to amplify ensemble brass moments of volume and clarity synthetically individually. However, this would foster innovation by creating a challenge for creative teams to solve to create such moments acoustically. Fiscal Impact: This proposal would not add any cost but will reduce the expenditures of many organizations that will no longer need to invest in extremely expensive amplification setups. Audience Impact: This rule will change the audience's impact for the better from a safety perspective. The ability to amplify the full acoustic ensemble has created full synthetic or enhanced ensemble volume levels for competitive units unsafe for DCI show attendees. Because all levels of the music ensemble can be turned up (brass, percussion, electronics), the prominence of brass amplification has led to front-row decibel levels of well over 100 DB for every unit participating. Show Promoter Impact: By improving the audience aural experience for the first 10+ rows of the stadium, show promoters bene2it by having the capacity to fully sell a stadium seating manifest without risk of complaints or reseating due to overly amplified volume. 2

2023 Rules Proposal: FIVE Logistics Impact: There is limited logistical impact other than expanding the already requested broadcast information to include individual amplified production areas to the DCI adjudication administrators, similar to show production sheets. Judging Impact: For Music Analysis judges, they are many times hearing the results of amplification and equalizing via an iPad or mixing board through speakers more so than the performers’ actual achievement. Consequently, it has become increasingly difficult for a judge to differentiate and contextually assess the source and quality of all sounds in performance. Likewise, a brass judge many times cannot accurately judge because of the amount of sound coming through speakers, particularly when speakers are on the field, and there is individual micing occurring during tutti ensemble passages. Additionally, the rule that brass judges must stay close to the sideline makes it extremely difficult for even brass judges who are behind the sideline speakers to accurately hear what is happening on the field with the bleed-over of the amplified sound coming out of the speakers. This proposal would require the Effect and Music ensemble judges have access to submitted information for reference during group performance. Submitted By: Jason Robb (Madison Scouts), Chris Komnick (Madison Scouts), Jim Coates (Carolina Crown), Michael Klesch (Carolina Crown), Monte Mast (The Cavaliers), David Starnes (The Cavaliers) 3

Proposal: Brass Pre-Recorded/ Sampling Electronics Management Submitted by: Jason Robb, Chris Komnick (Madison Scouts), Jim Coates, Michael Klesch (Carolina Crown)

2023 Rules Proposal: SIX Title of Proposed Change: Brass Pre-Recorded/Sampling Electronics Management Description: This rule would restrict the direct and simultaneous duplication of brass parts within the group’s brass score by similar pre-recorded or synthetic electronic voices communicating the parallel performance of a DCI brass line. Purpose: This rule would still allow for extensive electronic design and support while prohibiting a group from using synthetic or pre-recorded content that duplicates the contribution of the group’s brass line. This rule would preserve the educational intent of brass performance as it relates to ensemble contribution, balance, and clarity. This rule’s precedent parallels rule 4.2.4 from the WGI Winds Contest Rules. This rule would not impact the use of any current amplification practices of live performance. This rule would not affect the use of live sampling where the direct and simultaneous duplication of brass parts are not occurring. Educational Impact: Without the ability to increase the volume of the brass line via pre-recorded or synthetic sampling, this will preserve the integrity of the brass performance caption and the ensemble and effect captions - relying purely on the performance of the individual students to generate impact and effect through brass performance. Creative Impact: This rule would limit the electronic layer of groups from direct and simultaneous duplication of brass parts within the group’s brass score by similar pre-recorded or synthetic electronic voices but affect no other creative ability to utilize this layer for creative implementation. Fiscal Impact: This proposal would not add any cost but will reduce the expenditures of many organizations that will no longer need to invest in costly amplification/recording setups. Audience Impact: This rule will change the audience's impact from a safety perspective. The ability to sample pre-recorded/synthetic contributions parallel to the brass line has created 1

2023 Rules Proposal: SIX ensemble volume levels for competitive units unsafe for DCI show attendees. With every layer of the music ensemble amplified (brass, percussion, electronics), the prominence of brass amplification has led to front-row decibel levels of well over 100 DB for every unit participating. Show Promoter Impact: By improving the audience aural experience for the first 10+ rows of the stadium, show promoters benefit by having the capacity to fully sell a stadium seating manifest without risk of complaints or reseating due to overly amplified volume. Logistics Impact: N/A Judging Impact: N/A Submitted By: Jason Robb(Madison Scouts), Chris Komnick (Madison Scouts), Jim Coates (Carolina Crown), Michael Klesch (Carolina Crown) 2