[Goose]

There seem to be myriad problems with LSJUMB, the foremost to me as a former musician who spent two quarters in a P4 marching band before giving it up to get blackout drunk with my friends at games, is the music. It isn't good right now and I think the low numbers Goose references are a major contributing factor. Figure out how to get the numbers (of good musicians along with the tennis racket players) up and that goes a long way to solving issues.

I clearly agree that the numbers being so low does affect the quality of the music. However, as  Jacket3ree undoubtedly knows from his two quarters as a bandsman, doing even an adequate job with the music is a lot of work. You have to practice both individually and as a group. "Back in the day" the major redeeming feature of the LSJUMB was that it played a broad  repertoire of  "modern" music very well. This repertoire was constantly updated while retaining some "old standbys". The LSJUMB could be justly proud that its repertoire was larger, more varied and better executed than that of the more "traditional" marching bands in the conference. It has been a long time since that was true.

If you are going to assert that your model of a band is "better", you have to walk the walk. One particular aspect of the trumpet solo of the National Anthem was that it was played without electronic amplification. The soloist had to therefore play it LOUD, and every mistake would be embarrassingly obvious. Being chosen to play the solo was a "big deal". David Ruiz was a bit of a legend. His predecessors were good too. I remember one in particular practicing perhaps more than his fellow Stern Hall residents appreciated :-). I did know quite a few band members, which was easier when the band was larger :-).

The "scatter band" eliminates the need to march, but it doesn't fully eliminate the need to practice getting from one formation to another. That too takes time. For the Stanford Band model to "work", their halftime show "theme" has to actually be entertaining. I admit that I know Hal Mickelson and he was in my graduating class. His presentation of the halftime show was always understandable and almost always in sync with what was going on on the field. I certainly understand the necessity to eventually move on, but IMO the replacement announcers were/are often unintelligible and way behind what the band was actually doing. The performances degenerated to the point the announcers were trying to explain the jokes to the crowd and why they were funny. When it reaches the point you need to explain a joke, something is indeed wrong. While the LSJUMB themes were arguably sometimes in "bad taste" back in the day, they were usually entertaining. The approach became stale and IMO hasn't been "clever" for many years.
 
I think jacket3ree could have been a very productive member of the band. Many of them often got blind drunk AFTER the game.

[Goose]

There seem to be myriad problems with LSJUMB, the foremost to me as a former musician who spent two quarters in a P4 marching band before giving it up to get blackout drunk with my friends at games, is the music. It isn't good right now and I think the low numbers Goose references are a major contributing factor. Figure out how to get the numbers (of good musicians along with the tennis racket players) up and that goes a long way to solving issues.

I clearly agree that the numbers being so low does affect the quality of the music. However, as  Jacket3ree undoubtedly knows from his two quarters as a bandsman, doing even an adequate job with the music is a lot of work. You have to practice both individually and as a group. "Back in the day" the major redeeming feature of the LSJUMB was that it played a broad  repertoire of  "modern" music very well. This repertoire was constantly updated while retaining some "old standbys". The LSJUMB could be justly proud that its repertoire was larger, more varied and better executed than that of the more "traditional" marching bands in the conference. It has been a long time since that was true.

If you are going to assert that your model of a band is "better", you have to walk the walk. One particular aspect of the trumpet solo of the National Anthem was that it was played without electronic amplification. The soloist had to therefore play it LOUD, and every mistake would be embarrassingly obvious. Being chosen to play the solo was a "big deal". David Ruiz was a bit of a legend. His predecessors were good too. I remember one in particular practicing perhaps more than his fellow Stern Hall residents appreciated :-). I did know quite a few band members, which was easier when the band was larger :-).

The "scatter band" eliminates the need to march, but it doesn't fully eliminate the need to practice getting from one formation to another. That too takes time. For the Stanford Band model to "work", their halftime show "theme" has to actually be entertaining. I admit that I know Hal Mickelson and he was in my graduating class. His presentation of the halftime show was always understandable and almost always in sync with what was going on on the field. I certainly understand the necessity to eventually move on, but IMO the replacement announcers were/are often unintelligible and way behind what the band was actually doing. The performances degenerated to the point the announcers were trying to explain the jokes to the crowd and why they were funny. When it reaches the point you need to explain a joke, something is indeed wrong. While the LSJUMB themes were arguably sometimes in "bad taste" back in the day, they were usually entertaining. The approach became stale and IMO hasn't been "clever" for many years.
 
I think jacket3ree could have been a very productive member of the band. Many of them often got blind drunk AFTER the game.