Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, StarWasOverrated said:

Why would I have an issue with you liking Phantom Regiment? Do you have an issue with me not having an issue with you liking Phantom Regiment?

Good lord. Just stop. Atleast put some effort into it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, the more that I think about it, you probably can identify what visual design excellence looks like in a vocabulary form by merely looking at visual composition subcaptions winners through the years.  But keep in mind that the vocabulary is ever-expanding and must be open-ended (otherwise we wouldn't see anything fresh) and it's rating is connected to the other elements of the program.

You should only end up in the cynical category of fandom if you find that you personally disagree with the judges on a consistent basis (like you feel that 6th place should be 1st... not quibbling over who is 1st and 2nd).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Fred Windish said:

For drum corps Visual, I dwell on basic elements. Actions displaying accuracy and perfection within concepts I already understand. The obvious, the tried and true, the incontrovertible. Evaluations that engage my OWN eyes in judgment. I want to participate, too !

Straight lines

Smooth curves

Equal spacing

Standard shapes

Uniform height

Consistent velocity

 

 

I'm not a Blue Devils FAN as much as a BD APPRECIATOR. This is what they do consistently MUCH better than anyone else...with the exception of "Consistent velocity." That belonged to the Cadets of the 80s/90s and the Cavies into the 00s. It is no longer the focus, when it was back then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Tad_MMA said:

I'm not a Blue Devils FAN as much as a BD APPRECIATOR. This is what they do consistently MUCH better than anyone else...with the exception of "Consistent velocity." That belonged to the Cadets of the 80s/90s and the Cavies into the 00s. It is no longer the focus, when it was back then.

I wonder how much of this has to do with their emphasis on impeccable marching technique (no one looks like they're practically gliding on the field like BD does) and their drill learning style which I've heard involves very little in the form of drill books/dots and a lot more on staff guided free form movement that is meant to look organic more than anything

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, cfirwin3 said:

Actually, the more that I think about it, you probably can identify what visual design excellence looks like in a vocabulary form by merely looking at visual composition subcaptions winners through the years.  But keep in mind that the vocabulary is ever-expanding and must be open-ended (otherwise we wouldn't see anything fresh) and it's rating is connected to the other elements of the program.

You should only end up in the cynical category of fandom if you find that you personally disagree with the judges on a consistent basis (like you feel that 6th place should be 1st... not quibbling over who is 1st and 2nd).

Ahhhh.. but your posting still maintains that excellence is defined by the unifying opinions of those who adjudicated DCI over the past years (100% subjective opinion).  And while it apparently does not matter to DCI, I can prove where there is a vastly different opinion by experts of what constitutes as 'excellence in composition'.

I showed a video of the 2012 BD Cabaret Voltaire, along with a copy of the press release BD put out explaining the composition aspects of the design, to a few Art Historians and Professors.  Their reactions were all the same; that the composition aspects were far from being ‘excellent’ because it had no conceptual relationship whatsoever to the DaDa movement and did not reflect anything at all which was performed at Cabaret Voltaire.  They even went on to say that since DCI is a competitive outlet where rules, subjective though they may be, but where rules dictate structure in composition it was rather foolish for this show to even be presented in the name of ‘Cabaret Voltaire’.

The DCI GE judges based their decisions off of rules sheets set forth by DCI and thus maintained that the 2012 BD composition design was ‘excellent’; the Art Experts based their decisions off of artistic and historical accuracy and maintained that the 2012 BD composition design was ‘foolish’ and far from excellent.

So my question to you is this: Which experts cited here are correct in deciding what is and is not considered as ‘excellent composition’ for a show concerning DaDa and Cabaret Voltaire?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Cappybara said:

I wonder how much of this has to do with their emphasis on impeccable marching technique (no one looks like they're practically gliding on the field like BD does) and their drill learning style which I've heard involves very little in the form of drill books/dots and a lot more on staff guided free form movement that is meant to look organic more than anything

Which imo and experience is much harder ( or at least equal in some cases  )to do than a dot for dot placement. Looking random is no easy task and is more choreographed than many realize.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Stu said:

Ahhhh.. but your posting still maintains that excellence is defined by the unifying opinions of those who adjudicated DCI over the past years (100% subjective opinion).  And while it apparently does not matter to DCI, I can prove where there is a vastly different opinion by experts of what constitutes as 'excellence in composition'.

 

I showed a video of the 2012 BD Cabaret Voltaire, along with a copy of the press release BD put out explaining the composition aspects of the design, to a few Art Historians and Professors.  Their reactions were all the same; that the composition aspects were far from being ‘excellent’ because it had no conceptual relationship whatsoever to the DaDa movement and did not reflect anything at all which was performed at Cabaret Voltaire.  They even went on to say that since DCI is a competitive outlet where rules, subjective though they may be, but where rules dictate structure in composition it was rather foolish for this show to even be presented in the name of ‘Cabaret Voltaire’.

 

The DCI GE judges based their decisions off of rules sheets set forth by DCI and thus maintained that the 2012 BD composition design was ‘excellent’; the Art Experts based their decisions off of artistic and historical accuracy and maintained that the 2012 BD composition design was ‘foolish’ and far from excellent.

 

So my question to you is this: Which experts cited here are correct in deciding what is and is not considered as ‘excellent composition’ for a show concerning DaDa and Cabaret Voltaire?

 

The experts that you did not cite...

The fans, whom the judges not only represent but are bound to reference in the application of a GE score are the only experts that matter.  DCI has one relevant context, and that is the context of performing for large audiences in 11 minute blocks of time.

It's not possible for a musicologist or art historian devoid of an investment in the participation or consumption of the show to be an authority on its compositional excellence.

Your experiment is like inquiring as to the historical truthfulness of "Inglorious ########" as indicative of its compositional excellence as a film production.  It's a red herring... A fabrication of rules that doesn't reflect the boundaries of the idiom.

An easier example to follow would be to apply a similar criteria to the historicity of a figure skating program theme as the determining factor concerning its compositional value... That's a similar fabrication of boundaries.

In the end, your experiment proves that excellence in drumcorps composition does not satisfy a set of requirements that were never required to begin with.

The question is, did the audience at large enjoy the 2012 production, willingly recognizing it as a contending program, fully accepting of all of its loose reference and schtick?  And was the production written at an appropriate level of difficulty (as indicated by the audience) for a contending production?

The cynicism that you seem to represent relies on the indefensible assertion that judges can and effectively do judge programs devoid of the presence of an audience.  It's indefensible because it requires one to demonstrate that the audience at large is in disagreement with the judge's results at some level of consistency.  This, on the contrary is, I think, observable as untrue.

Edited by cfirwin3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, phd-student-TTU said:

Of course they're designed to the sheets because the designers create the criteria. 

 

But I'm wanting to know specifics on design...what's difficult? What's excellent about the visuals now?

I think corps are only just beginning to explore the range of visual possibilities unencumbered by years of living their corps-specific "brand", based their use of [mostly] military-derived uniforms. Unsurprisingly, these uniforms, as well as the military roots from which the activity evolved, informed the predominant style of movement: highly-regimented marching.

As the color guard activity evolved over the past 30-40 years - where once-taboo dance and themed costuming have now become standard - these same elements have gradually migrated into the visual repertoire of hornline and drumline, from simple horn and body moves at key impact points to the near-constant, highly-coordinated sequences we often see today.

So where are we now? Now that several corps are eschewing the overarching "brand" of their corps proper uniform for attire tied to each year's specific production, brass and drums - like the guard before them - are no longer constrained to move in the same fashion as before. There is fast becoming a breakdown in the lines between guard, hornline, and drumline where the whole ensemble can contribute visually, in-character, to the show. This seems to be what is rewarded by judges today.

And to your point - why is this difficult...why is this excellent? Well...why are there technical and lyric components to a brass audition? Why do we crave the ebb and flow of a gorgeous ballad followed by the raucous aggression of a highly-technical percussion feature? The diversity of programming creates interest and intrigue. Opening up the brass and drummmers to such possibilities demonstrates a broader range of skills that - when properly applied and mastered - raises the possible level of excellence.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, cfirwin3 said:

The experts that you did not cite...

The fans, whom the judges not only represent but are bound to reference in the application of a GE score are the only experts that matter.  DCI has one relevant context, and that is the context of performing for large audiences in 11 minute blocks of time.

It's not possible for a musicologist or art historian devoid of an investment in the participation or consumption of the show to be an authority on its compositional excellence.

Your experiment is like inquiring as to the historical truthfulness of "Inglorious ########" as indicative of its compositional excellence as a film production.  It's a red herring... A fabrication of rules that doesn't reflect the boundaries of the idiom.

An easier example to follow would be to apply a similar criteria to the historicity of a figure skating program theme as the determining factor concerning its compositional value... That's a similar fabrication of boundaries.

In the end, your experiment proves that excellence in drumcorps composition does not satisfy a set of requirements that were never required to begin with.

The question is, did the audience at large enjoy the 2012 production, willingly recognizing it as a contending program, fully accepting of all of its loose reference and schtick?  And was the production written at an appropriate level of difficulty (as indicated by the audience) for a contending production?

The cynicism that you seem to represent relies on the indefensible assertion that judges can and effectively do judge programs devoid of the presence of an audience.  It's indefensible because it requires one to demonstrate that the audience at large is in disagreement with the judge's results at some level of consistency.  This, on the contrary is, I think, observable as untrue.

1) If your criteria is Fan reaction, in that the judges are ‘bound’ to the reaction of the fans, and that the fans are the experts then I suggest you watch that entire 2012 finals again including the announcement of scores.  Because you will discover that most all of the other finalist corps received much more fan emotional explosion reaction than what that BD show received; and if your premise is true concerning the fans are the experts then BD should have placed near last in GE due to the many golf claps therein while other corps received way more wild explosions.  Moreover I can point to many retreats over the years where first place has gotten ‘booed’ which prove that at some capacity official GE judges certainly are devoid of the judgement of the fans.

2) Your comparison to Inglorious B******* does not work because A) The name of the movie was not meant to be representative of any true historical group, and B) the production company did not make any claims via the trailer or any press releases explaining the actual truthful relevance of what was being presented.  Whereas for the 2012 BD Cabaret Voltaire show a) the show title was purposely the actual name of a real historical place that spawned DaDa, and b) The BD design team provided press releases prior to the season explaining to the judges and audience in detail as to how the show truly represented DaDa at the Cabaret (which both aspects were actually far far far from being anywhere close to representing DaDa at the Cabaret let alone being truthfully accurate like they were claiming).

Addendum: The funny thing here is that the WWII scenes apart from the fictional story line within the movie Inglorious B******* more accurately represented what really occurred during WWII than how the BD 2012 show represented both DaDa and the Cabaret

3) My point still stands in that even through all of this, Composition Excellence is still 100% subjective; because there is absolutely no quantifiable reference point at all whatsoever which can be used by humans to make ‘artistic’ determinations.  Artistic Composition Excellence is in the eye of the beholder. What is excellent visual composition art to some experts (say the DCI judges concerning the BD show at hand as being an excellent composition representation of DaDa and the Cabaret), it is also considered as foolish and bad composition to other experts (as in the Art Historians who are the real experts at evaluating DaDa and what really went on at the Cabaret).

Edited by Stu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Stu said:

1) If your criteria is Fan reaction, in that the judges are ‘bound’ to the reaction of the fans, and that the fans are the experts then I suggest you watch that entire 2012 finals again including the announcement of scores.  Because you will discover that most all of the other finalist corps received much more fan emotional explosion reaction than what that BD show received; and if your premise is true concerning the fans are the experts then BD should have placed near last in GE due to the many golf claps therein while other corps received way more wild explosions.  Moreover I can point to many retreats over the years where first place has gotten ‘booed’ which prove that at some capacity official GE judges certainly are devoid of the judgement of the fans.

2) Your comparison to Inglorious B******* does not work because A) The name of the movie was not meant to be representative of any true historical group, and B) the production company did not make any claims via the trailer or any press releases explaining the actual truthful relevance of what was being presented.  Whereas for the 2012 BD Cabaret Voltaire show a) the show title was purposely the actual name of a real historical place that spawned DaDa, and b) The BD design team provided press releases prior to the season explaining to the judges and audience in detail as to how the show truly represented DaDa at the Cabaret (which both aspects were actually far far far from being anywhere close to representing DaDa at the Cabaret let alone being truthfully accurate like they were claiming).

Addendum: The funny thing here is that the WWII scenes apart from the fictional story line within the movie Inglorious B******* more accurately represented what really occurred during WWII than how the BD 2012 show represented both DaDa and the Cabaret

3) My point still stands in that even through all of this, Composition Excellence is still 100% subjective; because there is absolutely no quantifiable reference point at all whatsoever which can be used by humans to make ‘artistic’ determinations.  Artistic Composition Excellence is in the eye of the beholder. What is excellent visual composition art to some experts (say the DCI judges concerning the BD show at hand as being an excellent composition representation of DaDa and the Cabaret), it is also considered as foolish and bad composition to other experts (as in the Art Historians who are the real experts at evaluating DaDa and what really went on at the Cabaret).

Art historian can't be experts in drumcorps design without being drumcorps fans and consumers.  They can only be experts in art history.

I hear and see something remarkably different in the 2012 finals videos... but even if you could wrangle up enough fan opinion to support your personal observation (which you can't), you would need to have a consistent siding among fans across a wide range of seasons in order to be correct in even the most general sense.  Likewise it would seem that you wish for your case to be understood in a broad sense while your criticism be accepted on a few cherry picked specifics... I'm not sure that can work.

In the end, among fandom, you are a robust critic of DCI.  You certainly have company... But it's small (among fandom).  I don't mean that as a put down.  But it seems that you are clinging to an idiom that you simply don't like.  Drumcorps design (as is the case for art in general) is not only written for people TO enjoy, but is is also written for people WHO enjoy it... which is my whole point.

Nobody is disputing your assertion that art composition is subjective (although the OP was looking for an objective definition for it).  But if art composition is designed to/for the willing consumer (which in some cases is limited to the creator him/herself)... then they can be the only relevant experts.  YOU are more of an expert on drumcorps design than an academic specialist in an unrelated field.  However, it seems that you have become a less willing consumer of drumcorps design in recent years.

Maybe I'm getting the wrong impression...

Edited by cfirwin3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.