N.E. Brigand

The first two World Class judging sheets are General Effect Visual and General Effect Music. On both of those pages, the first bullet point under the heading "Repetoire Effect" reads "Audience Engagement", and the first bullet point under the heading "Performers" reads "Performers Engage the Audience". Now, as you indicate, there's lots more to be considered.

This year's BD fans keep making this point. I would love to learn about this in more detail than has (generally) been said so far. It would probably go a long way to helping the unwashed understand why "Cabaret Voltaire" is so good. This sort of disconnect between the general audience on one hand and the experts (including judges) on the other is not unique to drum corps. In figure skating (and sometimes in other judged sports), it seems to me that the winning athletes are quite often not the ones whose work most appeals to the audience -- and the television "experts" are often of no help in explaining the results. Which makes people suspect the judges are merely playing favorites, or have standards that are of no use to anyone but themselves. Have your tastes evolved, or devolved? Are the elements of BD's show you praise above superior to mere "entertainment"? If "entertainment" is so much easier to achieve* than dada, why don't the Blue Devils just throw some in there to keep the mass audience off their back? *I am reminded of George Bernard Shaw's comment on Oscar Wilde's critics, who said his works were simple trifles showing little talent. Shaw's (here paraphrased) reply: "I seem to be the only man in London who is not capable of writing an Oscar Wilde play. Given that his plays remain unique on the stage, it seems that we are indebted to the restraint of local scribes." (It's been years since I encountered the exact quote. This is a paraphrase I found here.) As easy as ignoring the fracked solo in 1989. (Which I did for years, because I knew that wonderful show only from the original CD, where semis or quarters were substituted.) One can always say that a show is good if you ignore the bad elements.

You mean some Danny Elfman Nightmare Before Christmas. Give musical credit where it's due. The movie's actual title is Tim Burton's The Nightmare Before Christmas. Though certainly Elfman's music (and singing) are central to the film's achievement!

I'm confused. The problems for many people is that they can hear the bottom synthesizer, not that it blends so well that they can't. Speaking for myself, I've noticed (and disliked) deep-synth in almost every corps' show this year.

Which piece(s) are you referring to?

WORLD CLASS 1 -- 90.40 -- Blue Devils 2 -- 89.55 -- Carolina Crown 3 -- 87.75 -- Phantom Regiment 4 -- 86.95 -- Cadets 5 -- 85.85 -- Santa Clara Vanguard 6 -- 84.85 -- Bluecoats 7 -- 83.05 -- Madison Scouts 8 -- 81.55 -- Boston Crusaders 9 -- 81.50 -- Cavaliers 10 - 80.45 -- Spirit of Atlanta 11 - 78.65 -- Blue Knights 12 - 77.95 -- Blue Stars 13 - 77.55 -- Crossmen 14 - 75.20 -- Glassmen 15 - 74.60 -- Academy 16 - 72.90 -- Colts 17 - 72.60 -- Troopers 18 - 72.35 -- Pacific Crest 19 - 69.80 -- Jersey Surf 20 - 66.95 -- Mandarins 21 - 65.10 -- Cascades 22 - 62.60 -- Pioneer OPEN CLASS 1 -- 78.40 -- Oregon Crusaders 2 -- 73.40 -- Genesis 3 -- 66.45 -- Forte 4 -- 63.15 -- Revolution

Hmm, neither does FaustianMachine's DCP thread thread, usually my first stop to check on current reps.

Well, 19 (years from 1993 to 2012) is a prime number and many Star Trek plots invoke Starfleet's "prime directive".

The countertenor voice is actually higher than the tenor -- it's basically falsetto.

There really isn't. If something is "bad", it has to be bad according to somebody. You can't prove it's bad. All you can prove is that lots of people think it's bad.

Um...

Wow. Lots of fascinating (if somewhat disorganized) information on that site. But clearly the term "mellophone" long predates the mellophonium. Thanks!

Thanks. Wikipedia is not very helpful on this subject: the mellophonium (and Kenton's use of it) is discussed in the "mellophone" article, but the article's general implication is that the term "mellophone" was used earlier for an instrument that looked more like a French horn.

I'll use this post as an excuse to ask: why are "mellophones" called that in the first place? As opposed to "Altos" or "Tenors", to match the other names?

Great story! Regarding this: As you may know, the 1926 Italian opera Turandot, source of Phantom's music this year, was actually staged in the Forbidden City in Beijing in 1997. There's a documentary about that production called The Turandot Project. As I understand it, at one point during the rehearsal process, some of the Chinese personnel serving as crowd-scene extras in the opera are heard to comment that the Western operatic singing sounds to them like moaning cows.

In DCI's early years, disco was mainstream. While corps did indeed play some disco tunes, they didn't include vocals. Was there much discussion at the time about how much better corps would be if they did?

My pleasure. I live to serve. And argue.

Here is the DCI News item explaining the system, which includes the Flash versions of the sheets. Liahona found printable pdf versions of the World Class sheets here.

I think we're actually saying much the same thing.* If a group plays out of tune, you judge them poorly, even if you happen to like music that is out of tune, because collectively your band circuit (and all the rest, but unanimity is not objectivity) has decided that groups should play in tune. Is that not so? I choose an extreme example to make the point clearly: the judging criteria are at their base a set of codified likes and dislikes. That's all I'm saying; I acknowledge it's a limited point. *Edit: I now realize I expressed myself poorly in the earlier post. I wrote: "What you're saying is that the judges aren't allowed to have different likes and dislikes than what the rules call for." I should have written: "What you're saying is that the judges aren't allowed to express different likes and dislikes (in their judging) than what the rules call for."

Now if we can just stop them running around the field...

As others have noted, "engagement" is not neutral: one can be positively or negatively engaged. Thus my question. And really, like or dislike bears entirely on how a show is judged. Collectively, standards have been put in place that at their roots are based on someone's likes and dislikes. Maybe I like music to be out of tune, and intervals that are uneven, and marching that is out of step. DCI has decided otherwise, based on its members' likes (though naturally based on a history of lots of other people liking the same things). What you're saying is that the judges aren't allowed to have different likes and dislikes than what the rules call for.

Improper for indoor playing maybe, but obviously proper technique for outdoors, if it worked. When it was decided that instruments like marimbas were to be used in drum corps, it ought to have been understood (and apparently was for about twenty years) that either these instruments wouldn't be distinctly heard when the rest of the corps was playing (you might think of them as condiments and garnishes for a meal) or that special methods would be needed. So new skills were developed that since 2004 have been lost. I know, I know, this cause is particularly lost. (J.R.R. Tolkien: "I do not expect 'history' to be anything but a 'long defeat'".) Obviously I agree with you about the prerecorded stuff.

So if the judges strongly dislike a show, they should score it higher than a show they only dislike a little?

Is the lighting run by a student/member, or by an adult/staffer?

Well, yesterday I used the Minneapolis VOD to note exactly where Blue Devils use voice samples. And after comparing the Blue Stars performance on the MN VOD to the Muncie VOD, I decided that no, their drill hadn't been simplified (though it is notably changed in the latter half) -- it was the higher camera angle that was making it seem less insane.