INDIANAPOLIS — Proposed changes to Drum Corps International's rulebook were up for a vote January 11 during the final day of the annual DCI winter business meetings.
READ: How a DCI rule is born – DCI Magazine Fall, 2024
Out of seven competitive rules presented, three passed through the Instructors' Caucus to be voted on by the DCI Voting Membership. Out of those three, two were passed — one with modified language. Passed rules will go into effect for the 2025 DCI Tour.
Here are the official Rules Congress voting results:
Solo Instrument Addition
Proposed by: Michael Gough, Mary Duerkop, Mike Ottoes, Tim Snyder (Troopers)
Summary: This proposal would allow each corps to feature one designated featured instrument — acoustic, woodwind, electronic or otherwise — throughout the season. This instrument could be amplified and enhanced with effects, creating new possibilities for musical expression and innovation on the field.
In their words: “By permitting unrestricted mic’ing and amplification of a single solo instrument, this rule enables a higher standard of sound quality and artistic expression, avoiding the limitations imposed by current amplification methods.”
This proposal was passed with the following modified language:
Featured Instrumentation
In a performance, a single, featured instrument not otherwise permitted by rule 4.8 may be used. Notwithstanding instruments otherwise allowed, this featured instrument may be used throughout the entire performance.
This featured instrument may be mic'd and amplified in any manner, including the use of effects, without restriction.
All existing rules regarding equipment, amplification, and electronic usage shall apply to all other instruments and equipment not designated as the sole featured instrument.
VOTE COUNT: YAY 16, NAY 2
Update Percussion Instrumentation
Proposed by: Eric Kosman (Mandarins)
Summary: Simply put, this proposal would update wording of a current rule to clarify allowed percussion instruments.
In their words: "The rules regarding percussion instrumentation are outdated compared to what corps have used for decades and currently only 'allow all acoustic percussion membrane and keyboard instruments' This technically means that non-mallet keyboard idiophones (cymbals, wood blocks, etc.) are currently not legal."
VOTE COUNT: YAY 18, NAY 0
Increase Overall Size of Pit Area
Proposed by: Aaron Beck (Bluecoats)
Summary: To accommodate evolving show designs, a proposal has been submitted to expand the size of the pit area, stretching it from the 30-yard line to the opposite 30-yard line. This change would give corps more room to showcase their front ensemble setups and creative staging, provided venues can support the adjustment.
In their words: “Allows for better spacing of the front ensemble with use of arcs and more creative setups rather than just two lines.”
VOTE COUNT: YAY 3, NAY 15
Addition of Percussion 2
Proposed by: Paul Rennick (Santa Clara Vanguard) & Percussion Instructor Caucus
Summary: A proposal to reinstate a second percussion judge could allow for more comprehensive evaluations of percussion performance, including the front ensemble and the entire percussion section. This change would ensure the intricacy and cohesiveness of percussion arrangements receive the recognition they deserve.
In their words: “With 100% of the percussion caucus in agreement, it is clear the Percussion 1 judge is essential, but the addition of another judge is needed to account for the front ensemble and all non-battery performers, which can be considered a completely different category of instruments in the percussion family.”
All Field Performance 15 foot marker
Proposed by: Chris Holland (Boston Crusaders)
Summary: In an effort to prioritize safety for performers and judges, this proposal would limit field judges to areas outside the 15-foot boundary line near the front sideline. This builds on existing guidelines, ensuring that judges can assess performances effectively without impeding choreography or props.
In their words: “The benefit is that performers can fully immerse themselves in their craft, visually and musically, without interference from on-field judges. Performers visually no longer have to account for the unknown. Performer safety is enhanced. All non performer human variables are now off the performance field."
General Effect Adjudication Change
Proposed by: Michael Gough, Mary Duerkop, Mike Ottoes, Tim Snyder (Troopers)
Summary: This proposal seeks to separate the General Effect caption into two distinct categories — General Effect Visual and General Effect Music — rather than the all-encompassing “overall effect” approach currently applied to the caption.
In their words: “Separating GE into visual and music categories allows for more equitable assessment, acknowledging that excellence in one area should not overshadow achievements in another.”