DCI 2014 had attendance growth from previous couple of years

[Pete Freedman]

Pete, are you inferring that the general Drum Corps audience is increasingly mirroring the general societal malais of judging according to the level of "instant gratification"? If so, then I stand with you on this sentiment.

Interesting comparison. Imagine if Gabby Douglas had spent much of her routine doing simpler versions of the most impressive moves, building to the big moves. Maybe that would have entertained the audience more. But of course, the judges need to see the most varied set of difficult moves possible. So I suppose in effect they need to be instantly gratified.

I never thought of DCI judges as overstimulated before, but it's an interesting way of looking at it.

[Jeff Ream]

The simplest way to put this is, growing an audience base means attracting people to a venue who would not otherwise be there, if not for the effort YOU put forth. Step 2 is to get them to return the following year. Justify the investment of their discretionary entertainment dollars. In other words . . . . . make them happy! Seems to me, if you plan to entice new audience members into a sports stadium, they enter with the expectation of being dazzled, and want to meet that emotion with cheers and applause. Over, and over again!

The type of DCI programming I witnessed in 2014 was successful in achieving this mission, more so than during some previous DCI years. Shows designs were presented that, I believe, would appeal to audiences outside of family, friends, and former marchers. Show designs that could play in anyone's neighborhood. That's a good thing!

Now then, like the movies, That's Entertainment !

agree. top to bottom, the shows were far more accessible to the wide audience

[HornTeacher]

Interesting comparison. Imagine if Gabby Douglas had spent much of her routine doing simpler versions of the most impressive moves, building to the big moves. Maybe that would have entertained the audience more. But of course, the judges need to see the most varied set of difficult moves possible. So I suppose in effect they need to be instantly gratified.

I never thought of DCI judges as overstimulated before, but it's an interesting way of looking at it.

When I used the term "judging," it was in the context of the audience (original quote: Pete, are you inferring that the general Drum Corps audience is increasingly mirroring the general societal malais of judging according..." We, as audience members, judge -- we just don't assign numbers. It was the general audience (and in comparison, the general society) of which I was speaking, not the adjudicators themselves. I'm sorry for the lack of clarity.

[Pete Freedman]

Pete, are you inferring that the general Drum Corps audience is increasingly mirroring the general societal malais of judging according to the level of "instant gratification"? If so, then I stand with you on this sentiment.

Ok, so let me respond to this again, given my misunderstanding of your use of judging.

I suppose you could say that evaluating each moment of the show, largely ignoring the big picture or meaning (if any) is a kind of instant gratification, yes. I'm not sure it's the same kind of instant gratification you refer to as a social problem. In fact I think the audience would prefer a better-developed show that evolved over 11 minutes in which everything that happens serves an ultimate artistic point. The activity has never really had shows like that. Or, shows with 3 distinct tunes each of which develop reasonably fully, and which relate to the show title. The activity used to have shows like that.

Instead we have 6 or 8 ideas, many with variations. And that's because the activity feels it's in the best interests of education. These shows are effectively exercises more than true performing arts works. I'm saying fans accept it, not that they want it.

[Jeff Ream]

check out the finals week stats, including Fan network views.

finals, if everyone just paid the $50 to watch online, brought in $680,000 before expenses.