Segmentation: How DCI Has Gotten More Complicated... And Less Difficult

[Fred Windish]

9 minutes ago, SuncoastCrown said:

I for one, am interested in hearing possible solutions, but I also wonder how many agree that these are issues that need to be fixed.  Any ideas?

Immediate need . . . .

Get better control of amplification standards.

Next . . . .

Allow MELODY a greater amount of time to be embraced by the audience.

 

Edited August 11, 2017 by Fred Windish

[c mor]

This seems like a profitable discussion thread....

I think, whereas the previous big issue was defining GE, now the issue is Demand.   How is it defined, derived, considered and to what proportion/weight, rewarded?

 

 

[GUARDLING]

1 minute ago, c mor said:

This seems like a profitable discussion thread....

I think, whereas the previous big issue was defining GE, now the issue is Demand.   How is it defined, derived, considered and to what proportion/weight, rewarded?

 

 

1st lets start out by maybe understanding that what " seems " to be easier, less demanding, the easy way out etc etc most often is completely the opposite. Also to make sense ( to many , including judges ) of something abstract in nature can be a very difficult design choice if not done well. Teaching something abstract, even if it isn't ones cup of tea can be far more tedious and requires exact placements over and over by every member and is far more choreographed than most think.

[AlexL]

Very well written OP.

I'm not sure what the 'solution' is, but it is something i have noticed as well.  

Demand vs clean is one of the balances every corps has to strike. I've often wondered if maybe 'clean' is a bit unbalanced in that regard. And why is that a negative? Well, if nothing else, in terms of entertainment value greater demand will often have greater returns.  Past a certain point, each degree of clean has increasingly diminishing returns for your average fan so if anything the balance should tilt towards demand instead of the opposite where it lies now. 

Some reading this thread will take it as a hate on BD, but honestly it shouldn't. BD just understands the game. If the game changed to something that rewarded differently, i'm sure they'd excel at that as well. 

 

 

[denverjohn]

"Demand" aka "exposure to error" has only been rewarded briefly on score sheets over the years.

Not a large factor today except perhaps as "simultaneous responsibility".

I would prefer some reference to "multiple responsibility".

(ie. individuals can sing AND play, conduct, spin)

Soloists can solo AND play with the ensemble.(ie. not hang out under props-see go-pro videos)

[pags]

The only thing I can offer to this discussion is the thought (which I will not posture as "fact," but just something to consider based on my own perspective) that the brilliance and curse of great design and superior performance is that it makes what is very difficult appear very easy, lending itself to perspective from others that the design and demand are cutting corners.  It represents a different philosophy in auditory and visual presentation, but I don't see evidence it is inherently more or less difficult than the design/demand that came before it.  This is true for any/all corps, not just the Blue Devils.  I think there is far more coordination and integration (vs. segmentation) than we often give credit for in these spread out "pods."   

The original poster didn't really address this element, but it is worth noting the impact of increased prop usage.  When you utilize props, particularly large ones, it necessarily impacts how you design your movement of personnel.  One person's "effective placement" is another's "clutter," so I won't even begin to try to convince anyone which way they should interpret it, but it is an element that impacts visual presentation nonetheless, and if you are looking for an area where a potential "solution" (assuming you identify what is currently going on as a "problem") exists, then the number and/or size and/or amount of movement of props could be starting places visually in terms of how the "corps proper" utilizes the full field for formations and transition drill.

As to the "drill v. body movement difficulty" debate, the only analogy I can offer is that it is very difficult to run a sprint; it is also very difficult to hold a plank position.  Borth tax you and are difficult, but in different ways, especially when you add in a simultaneous demand of another activity (i.e. performance).  Judges (in the recordings I used to hear) typically referred to this as a difference in performance demand and environmental demand.

I don't want to go down too many rabbit holes, but I feel compelled to at least mention that the OP could have used a better example than 2009 Blue Devils for the breakdown of musical presentation/demand changes.  Yes, there are some soloist and small ensemble moments used in that show, but for the most part it was NOT carried by soloists.  You would have had a far better argument with 2004 BD as an example for critique.  Further, even if what was written was true of the 2009 production, I find it disingenuous to use one show from one year as representative of what is happening to the activity as a whole, particularly since the way BD designed and performed that show from a musical standpoint was very different than 2010, 2011, 2012, etc.  If our tastes cannot allow for variety in musical presentation then I feel the problem is with us as reviewers and not the activity or corps as a presenter.

I have other thoughts, but also a job that I must return to...

 

[c mor]

I read the OP as: Segmentation is easier and shouldn't be rewarded as it currently seems to be.

I don't know the sheets, but I imagine demand/multi-responsibility is only one of maybe 8-10 factors to be considered with respect to content?

 

Are judges constantly only thinking, "Was that demanding?  Was that clean?"   I get the feeling that many of us spectators think that way, and believe the judges should too.   Am I off base there?

Edited August 11, 2017 by c mor

[leanlion]

1 hour ago, Fred Windish said:

Immediate need . . . .

Get better control of amplification standards.

Next . . . .

Allow MELODY a greater amount of time to be embraced by the audience.

Fred, you must be a Communist.

MELODY, you say MELODY- how dare you!

Don't you know we are in the brave new world of THE EYEBALL..

The ear isn't to be used anymore.

Go dig out a vinyl and listen to Archie play "My Romance".

I bet you think 128 to 132 for only the civilized

 

 

[cube]

2 hours ago, hostrauser said:

I like Vanguard's show better this season, but their design definitely seems to have been of the "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" mindset. SCV is going to have their best finish in almost 20 years essentially by performing a Blue Devils visual book.

I disagree completely and utterly. Take a look at some of the drill SCV performs this year.

[hostrauser]

49 minutes ago, c mor said:

I read the OP as: Segmentation is easier and shouldn't be rewarded as it currently seems to be.

Somewhat. For me, segmentation is less enjoyable. As far as difficulty, it has transferred the primary focus away from ensemble cleanliness and onto individual skill. So while I feel the ensemble demands are falling away, I would also argue the INDIVIDUAL demands (especially visually) are the highest they've ever been. And the coordination of elements really bothers me: even in very well designed shows (by modern standards) corps almost never "max out" all aspects at the same time, except for maybe the closer and a few seconds here or there during the bulk of the show. I'm not looking for eleven minutes of blastissimo either, I just want interesting/difficult music to ACCOMPANY interesting/difficult visual more often than it is occurring in modern DCI.