As a preface, my experience playing duets via Zoom is that in addition to the latency, Zoom doesn't handle the simultaneous sounds well -- I can hear myself or my partner, but not both.
That said, a few experiments you could try:
IF the latency between each instrumentalist and the conductor is close enough to the same, the conductor can conduct as usual, and to each player, it will seem they are in time. The burden falls to the conductor to stay consistently ahead of the beat (and therefore out of sync with the heard performance). MightIt might be necessary for each performer to turn off their own speakers.
Try arranging or creating some music that incorporates phasing, and therefore might even benefit from the latency. This would be highly non-traditional as far as brass band repertoire, but could be a fun, experimental way to incorporate the kinds of exercises you describe above. For example, take a look/listen to "In C" by Terry Riley (
) or any of Steve Reich's "phasing" pieces (e.g., ). The pieces I mention depend on rhythmic exactness, so you wouldn't be able to play them as intended, but the latency problem might allow you to catch the spirit of them in interesting ways.Have one musician improvise a short musical segment or phrase and have each band member in succession pick up the idea and continue or develop it in some way. Latency would probably create awkward rhythmic breaks between each musician, but since the primary exercise is one of listening and being musically creative, the breaks between phrases might be not only tolerable, but necessary.
Picking up on that idea, you could try a game of "operator". Only two musicians communicate at a time, with everyone else turning off their speakers. Musician #1 plays a musical idea -- maybe from a piece you're rehearsing, maybe improvised -- to Musician #2. Musician #1 turns speakers off and Musician #3 turns them on. And so forth until you come back to Musician #1 to see if the phrase has maintained correct notes, rhythm, tempo, dynamics, etc. No cheating by watching to see what fingering is being used.
A "Watching the conductor" excercise / game: The conductor conducts and everyone else tries to guess which piece (or section thereof) is being conducted. Good practice for both conductor and band!
or any of Steve Reich's "phasing" pieces, such as
)The pieces I mention depend on rhythmic exactness, so you wouldn't be able to play them as intended, but the latency problem might allow you to catch the spirit of them in interesting ways.
Have one musician improvise a short musical segment or phrase and have each band member in succession pick up the idea and continue or develop it in some way. Latency would probably create awkward rhythmic breaks between each musician, but since the primary exercise is one of listening and being musically creative, the breaks between phrases might be not only tolerable, but necessary.
Picking up on that idea, you could try a game of "operator". Only two musicians communicate at a time, with everyone else turning off their speakers. Musician #1 plays a musical idea — maybe from a piece you're rehearsing, maybe improvised — to Musician #2. Musician #1 turns speakers off and Musician #3 turns them on. And so forth until you come back to Musician #1 to see if the phrase has maintained correct notes, rhythm, tempo, dynamics, etc. No cheating by watching to see what fingering is being used.
A "Watching the conductor" exercise / game: The conductor conducts and everyone else tries to guess which piece (or section thereof) is being conducted. Good practice for both conductor and band!