3rd Glasgow BB Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 I have a suggestion why not ask these questions of the Crown's Design Team? As an alumni of Crown I'm sure they would welcome your interest. because design teams love nothing more than being questioned by the public about their design decisions........... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corbin Posted March 13, 2012 Author Share Posted March 13, 2012 (edited) because design teams love nothing more than being questioned by the public about their design decisions........... You may have to show some grace to Splat...he seems to get somewhat upset when Crown gets critiqued in any way. Edited March 13, 2012 by Corbin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAvery Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 When you think back at shows that have won, there is a high level of sophistication. And these shows work on many levels. I think this is where Crown is lacking. Over the past few years their shows have been performed well and are very entertaining, but not so sophisticated. Even when you take Star as an example, which they clearly are, it makes sense. Look at the maturation in the design of Star’s shows prior to 91. Star’s placement improved as the sophistication level of the show increased. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glory Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 I don't know about this suggestion some are making that DESIGN is the uber issue as if Crown's designs have been deficient or other's execution inconsequential. Take 2009 when Crown had a wonderful vehicle to work with. Was the BD design that year that superior to Crown's? And if so how? I think BD's 2009 design wasn't visionary in the way that some might view 2010. BD 2009 wasn't conceived with the crowd appeal of Phantom 2008 or the visual genius of BD 2010. What it was was an excellent showcase for BD execution. In that respect, BD 2009's design was not unlike BD 2007 or 2008. Was Crown's 2009 design inherently inferior to BD's that year? I don't think so. Crown's approach had more opportunity for crowd appeal that year. It certainly had ample opportunity for the music to shine as well. So what was lacking? I think it comes down to execution (as it should). BD was better on the field. If they got better visual scores, it wasn't because one had an inherently better design. It was because BD sold the design a little better with superior execution. To oversimplify, BD marching Crown's design still would have won the championship in 2009. How many examples are there of designs/corps combinations that can't lose from the past decade? Cavies 2002? Cadets 2005? Those are the two highest scoring shows, so maybe. Who would argue that Phantom 2008 was a design that can't lose? It almost did. I might give a nod to Cavies 2006 and BD 2010 for their visual vision. I can't see destiny in BD 2003 or 2007 or Cavies 2001 or 2004. Crown had a fair shot in 2009. They just couldn't bring the show along rapidly enough to pass BD. HH 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michsta8 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 There are many experienced people that post on DCP including current and former DCI members and staff. I would like some good reflection on what you believe has honestly held Crown back from the title over the last few years and what they need to do this year in order to really compete for the title. Put them in Cadet uniforms 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plan9 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 I don't know about this suggestion some are making that DESIGN is the uber issue as if Crown's designs have been deficient or other's execution inconsequential. Take 2009 when Crown had a wonderful vehicle to work with. Was the BD design that year that superior to Crown's? And if so how? I think BD's 2009 design wasn't visionary in the way that some might view 2010. BD 2009 wasn't conceived with the crowd appeal of Phantom 2008 or the visual genius of BD 2010. What it was was an excellent showcase for BD execution. In that respect, BD 2009's design was not unlike BD 2007 or 2008. Was Crown's 2009 design inherently inferior to BD's that year? I don't think so. Crown's approach had more opportunity for crowd appeal that year. It certainly had ample opportunity for the music to shine as well. So what was lacking? I think it comes down to execution (as it should). BD was better on the field. If they got better visual scores, it wasn't because one had an inherently better design. It was because BD sold the design a little better with superior execution. To oversimplify, BD marching Crown's design still would have won the championship in 2009. How many examples are there of designs/corps combinations that can't lose from the past decade? Cavies 2002? Cadets 2005? Those are the two highest scoring shows, so maybe. Who would argue that Phantom 2008 was a design that can't lose? It almost did. I might give a nod to Cavies 2006 and BD 2010 for their visual vision. I can't see destiny in BD 2003 or 2007 or Cavies 2001 or 2004. Crown had a fair shot in 2009. They just couldn't bring the show along rapidly enough to pass BD. HH There is a great deal of merit in what you say here, but I don't agree that BD marching CC's show in 2009 would have won. As much as the chairs were maligned on DCP, they were a stroke of design genius and separated the field. They were risky and innovative, and the judges loved them. And yes, the chairs perhaps highlighted BD's exceptional execution, but they were still used in remarkable ways, and they won by a huge margin. I still believe that it's the unique aspect of design that becomes the "tie breaker" among the top 3 or 4 corps. It is perhaps a Chicken or Egg question (Design or Performance). But I believe performance is the ticket to the top 3, but design make the difference. Two examples in the extreme: 1) PR 08 - IMO they were out performed by BD (who won most captions)....but that design was genius, another level altogether. 2) Look at Cadets last year....they were at a different level also in terms of design...just genius. "It's the design...stupid!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 I don't know about this suggestion some are making that DESIGN is the uber issue as if Crown's designs have been deficient or other's execution inconsequential. Take 2009 when Crown had a wonderful vehicle to work with. Was the BD design that year that superior to Crown's? And if so how? I think BD's 2009 design wasn't visionary in the way that some might view 2010. BD 2009 wasn't conceived with the crowd appeal of Phantom 2008 or the visual genius of BD 2010. What it was was an excellent showcase for BD execution. In that respect, BD 2009's design was not unlike BD 2007 or 2008. Was Crown's 2009 design inherently inferior to BD's that year? I don't think so. Crown's approach had more opportunity for crowd appeal that year. It certainly had ample opportunity for the music to shine as well. So what was lacking? I think it comes down to execution (as it should). BD was better on the field. If they got better visual scores, it wasn't because one had an inherently better design. It was because BD sold the design a little better with superior execution. To oversimplify, BD marching Crown's design still would have won the championship in 2009. How many examples are there of designs/corps combinations that can't lose from the past decade? Cavies 2002? Cadets 2005? Those are the two highest scoring shows, so maybe. Who would argue that Phantom 2008 was a design that can't lose? It almost did. I might give a nod to Cavies 2006 and BD 2010 for their visual vision. I can't see destiny in BD 2003 or 2007 or Cavies 2001 or 2004. Crown had a fair shot in 2009. They just couldn't bring the show along rapidly enough to pass BD. HH I'm not sure BD wins with a different drill design to be honest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corpsband Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 Crown had a fair shot in 2009. They just couldn't bring the show along rapidly enough to pass BD. Agree with this. Crown did not get quite clean enough visually to win in '09. That show was a winning design however. '10 was design (overly ambitious horn line staging that they couldn't get consistently clean (musically) and couldn't adequately fix). '11 too hard to overcome pre-conceived notions about rock shows i guess. they were actually clean by finals and the book was as tough as anyone's. they performed the snot out of that show and IMO should have finished higher. '12. Love what I've heard so far. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 (edited) When you think back at shows that have won, there is a high level of sophistication. And these shows work on many levels. I think this is where Crown is lacking. Over the past few years their shows have been performed well and are very entertaining, but not so sophisticated. Even when you take Star as an example, which they clearly are, it makes sense. Look at the maturation in the design of Star’s shows prior to 91. Star’s placement improved as the sophistication level of the show increased. Corps always run the risk when they do " sophisticated shows " of winning the hearts and minds of 12 judges, but in the procees losing the love of thousands of Drum Corps fans. That is precisely what happened to Star as they rose up the ranks of the placement ladder. Its a trade off some Corps are more than willing to make. That said, there are certainly years when Corps win a DCI Title AND were the favorite of most fans that year. We only have to look back as recently as 2008 to see that Phantom Regiment won a DCI Title that year with the Theme production of " Spartacus ", hardly a show and theme that would be considered " sophisticated " by most people. There have been sereral other years where Corps have won the DCI Title with shows and themes that had popular appeal and were not considered all that high brow and " sophisticated ". So its quite possible to bridge the gap and be both appealing to judges and audiences alike. Its just difficult to do, thats all. But this should nor prevent Corps show designers from attempting the difficult, imo. Edited March 13, 2012 by BRASSO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowtown Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 '11 too hard to overcome pre-conceived notions about rock shows i guess. no, that wasn't it and they were clean by finals and started off clean too the show stalled, had no where to go, didn't grow and the new ending didn’t work well and save it, they ran out of show(design) it was the same story for Cadets in 2010 I agree a lot with White Dawn and Plan 9 here For a new corps to win, it has to be a knock out punch and I haven’t seen that from them yet. 2009 was close as they had the design and brass but the rest, mainly the visual....needed a bit more it will be interesting to see how the new sheets work 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.