Stu

No clue about what is used and done in drum corps. Hmmm. Let's see: Pros in Symphonies, Jazz, Funk, Rock play Bb brass; what do drum corps use? Pros in Symphonies, Jazz, Funk, and some Rock play Vibes and other Mallets; what do drum corps use? Pros in Rock, Funk, and Jazz play Rudiments and their variations along with liner grooves on drums, many times with multiple percussionists playing different drums; what types of drum writing do drum corps play? Pros in Rock, Funk, and Jazz use Guitars and Keys; what do drum corps use? Pros on Broadway and many Rock groups choreograph their on stage movement, prop movement, and dance; what do drum corps do? (if you say 'corps march dang it' to that question, well while there is some of that element in today's drum corps, that archaic response based on the modern staging designs will be laughable). Oh, and many Pros tour and play in venues like Lucas Stadium in front of massive crowds; what do corps do? I guess the pros would no nothing about what a drum corps does now at all!! The shift wouldn't go well for the closed minded trapped in their own way of seeing drum corps, cough, cough. But that has happened a plethora of times since 1972. It would be convincing corps to give up controling the words put on the sheets, and give up telling the judges how to interpret the sheets when evaluating them; that would be the hardest sell. So getting a corps to propose it from the inside would be a trick. Nevertheless, if there is a corps that might, just might, be persuaded to be open to trying to sell it say in the GE captions, if it could benifit them and be shown that it would likely help DCI, it would be the Blue Devils They are already so well structured to adapt to the changing tides that they would just write to the new sheets and new interps without a glitch, and likely go on being winners. But just with a fresh new GE show design look, direction, and feel. That said. This is a DCP thread. One that merely wanted spitball thinking concerning out of the box ideas for future creative changes. To have fun proposing the ideas. It even has the word game in the title. So to think I would approach a corps with this, even though I personally like it, is not my intent.

This all started because I proposed an idea in line with the request of the original poster. The conversation went sideways. So in order to straighten this back out, I just got off the phone with a friend of mine who has vast experience with the psychology of competition and sport. He has worked with all types of competition training including Olympic trials, many of which utilize observed judging just like the marching arts, and he has enjoyed seeing DCI over the years. So, I asked him about the rabbit trail of this thread. Here is a summary of what he said: A trial jury consisting of people with various backgrounds, education and personal bias can deliberate, reread transcripts, deliberate again, spend days compromising on their bias, then hopefully come to a conclusion. However, those needing to make immediate decisions do not have that luxury. If someone, or a group, had to contemplate and mull over the things being presented in real time it would be impossible to make even simple choices without falling behind or worse. So, because of the sheer complexity of the transmission of live information, when judges are in real time situations they must rely on, believe it or not, Bias; or more specifically Cognitive Bias. It allows people to reach conclusions quickly based on their education, training, knowledge of historical data, and personal experience. Drum Corps and all of marching arts is artistic expression; and as far as we know life/death or possible incarceration factors are not determined by the adjudicators. And we all can agree, save a few, that defining quality within artistic expression is purely subjective. Educated. trained. and experienced opinion is required yes, but it is still opinion. We can all agree that the marching arts judges must make quick decisions on the fly in real time. And we all agree if a bunch of judges were pulled from many different mind-sets the ratings, rankings, scores would be, as Jeff put it, out of whack. So, to help create consistency in observed adjudication like ice dancing and drum corps, human bias is, again believe it or not, not eliminated. We just make sure the judges have similar education, similar training, similar historical knowledge, and similar experience. Then we put them through trials to make sure the Cognitive Bias of each and every judge is pretty much in the same strike zone. Thus very close consistency while judging observed live situations arises. It leads to trends, some say slotting, but it is consistent. Switching to having highly qualified professionals create the sheets, be in charge of training on how to interpret, and adjudicating would, according to the psychology of competition, yield different results in the years going forward than years past; but those results would still be just as fair and consistent as the previous years. Just different. And since this is artistic expression, the corps would just adjust to the different evaluation of those judges with the different Cognitive Bias than the current judges. And after a few shows under the belt, new trends and new so called slotting would start to materilize, but with ratings, rankings, and scores based on the new system. That shift, even though it would still create consistency, would, of course, still be considered as ‘out of whack’ for the established who are so ingrained with the belief that the current way is the only best way to determine good v bad drum corps. But so it goes....

Oh don't be coy. Should be really easy for you. Let me point you in 'your' direction: check out 1974, 1975, 1984, and 2012.

Deriving pleasure through purposly irritating others without care comes in two forms, Sadistic and Schadenfreude. Just sayin.

Already stated the perennial three who had always taken the top spots did not want us back but will elaborate. Each of those bands had over 300 on the field; in our eyes and ears they were sloppy, many out of step, intonation problems, phasing problems, etc... But they had been winning for 20+ years. The sponsor and host understood why we placed them down, but when the three bands who produce the most parent ticket sales, purcase the most souvies and concessions state they will not return, guess who got axed? Not them but us. So put that in your hunch assumptions the next time you have a hunch that a judging crew was incompetent.

As to your hunch, the sponsor is still my friend and the host still wants me to write for his band, and they both still maintain the reason I provided is true. So either they are lying through their teeth making them horrible people and your hunch is correct. Or your hunch is out to lunch. But on to the rest of your posting... Checking tolerances on a camshaft with a micrometer in a machine shop is precise. Tolerances using observable interpritation of artistic expression is fuzzy logic. Sort of like making a determination as to when an apple becomes an apple core as you are consuming it? You can say that the tolerences are wider in DCA than DCI. And you can say trained eyes and ears can determine different tolerance levels to that specific of a level. But in truth artistic expression is not measurable except by observed interpritation; which is always flawed in that there is no way at all to accuratly determine when the line is crossed. That should have been learned back in the day with this unanswerable question: When does a tick actually materialize? Your (if you want to be shot) statement only reinforces that judging clones are desirable. Oh, and I could not care less what you think about my honesty. But think if this: in two posts I have commeded you, your education, your experience, and stated it has merit and value. I have disagreed with your opinions, but never made personal shots. Many posts you typed to me, including taking a whack at my honesty in this post, were personal sarcastic snipes. Just sayin.

So he was not positioning, spacing, scoring, rating, ranking, giving feedback, etc lock stepping to established norms, trends, tolerences, of those trained in combining likemindness with peer expectations. And that was considered out of whack. And the marching arts claim they really do 'not' want clones judging. Hmmmmmm

Please note the subject matter of the thread and what the OP was seeking. I am not being dismissive; I am just presenting an idea of doing something never tried. As per the request of the OP. And am defending the idea as being just as valid as the current system.

Ding ding ding!!! Now honesty wins out!!! Tolerances and norms exist in DCI also. That is what most people identify as slotting, clone judging, and the other closed minded habits developed by competent but like minded judges who have no desire for outside professional interpretation. If professional outsiders do come in, and are not trained in the established way of tolerences and norms, the results are deemed 'out if whack' instead of deemed as what they really are which is merely alternate ways of evaluating artistic expression that are just as valid.

MikeD and Fran. I never advocated just throwing a non drum corps professional in hidgely pidgely. That was the accusation by Jeff which started our tiff. Nope; go back and look at all of my posts. I advocated for non drum corps professionals to create the sheets, define the interpretation of critera, and revamp the entire system. Not only tump over the apple cart but to tear it apart and rebuild it with their mindset. It would be fair and equal for all corps, just different than the current system. As for the objective/subjective issue, I am just trying to get Jeff to admit that his adjudicating is just as subjective as any other artistic Interpritation.

This is a DCI thread. And while the Madison Scouts are a member of DCI, your 1971 pick made me chuckle. It is sort of like saying your favorite 'Super Bowl' was the Cleveland Browns vs. the Green Bay Packers in the 1965 Championship game. One year prior to the first Super Bowl.

1988 Suncoast Sound: Symphonic Dances for the Contemporary Child (some of the most creative music arranging I have ever heard in DCI) 2014 Boston Crusaders: Animal Farm (the underlying message and the G7 formation) 1992 VK: Magical Mystery Tour P3 (shear fun with quality performance) 2011 Madison Scouts: New York Morning (wonderful tribute with deep emotion)

Try some smooth bourbon. The amount you will need in order to relieve the pain will depend on your degree of agreement. 😏

Having a trumpt player play an A into an oscilloscope, measuring the wave to see how close it is to 440 without wavering, is an objective evaluation. So please infom us how your sheet interprative observation is objective, not the sheet itself, but how your application was objective.

The sponsor of the show, the hosting band director, the tabulators, etc were all fine with our evaluations. They told that to us directly just prior to scores being announced. They appreciated new professional eyes and ears evaluating the programs. But the sponsor contacted us a few weeks later, apologized profusely, and said the perennial bands who were not placed in the top three were not going to return unless the previous judges were also returning. Now you might want to say they were all lying to us that night to be polite. He## you probably will accuse me of lying now. However, I really do not care. I am still good friends with the sponsor, and have written a few shows for the host band. So go ahead and be your snarky self. I should have expected it.

The words on the sheet are the words on the sheet. That is true. However, the sheet does not judge. You do. And it is your interpretation of the words on the sheet based off of your education, your training, and your experience which evaluates, scores, rates, and ranks performances. Due to your education, training, and experience, your interpretation and opinions have merit and value. But there is no way around the fact that your interpretation is 100% purely subjective opinion. Moreover, two extremely educated, extremely trained, and extremely experienced people can come up with two vastly different interpretations of the same document. All you need to do is look at the Constitution and the Supreme Court to realize it is true. (Please note that was not designed to be taken as political, but only used to show that two extremely qualified people can come to vastly different interpretations of the exact same document). Observation based on interpritation is always subjective opinion not objective. And there is no way around it. You just want your established defined subjective interpretation opinion to stay intact.

In your opnion they performed the hell out of it. In your opinion it matched what the sheet interprition should be. And with other groups in your opinion they did not perform the he## out of it. Yes you pulled that from your training and experience; and that should be respected. But it was still your subjective opinion nonetheless. I know professionally trained musicians, and also trained in a judging system, who would also likely have a vastly different opinion than yours. Does that make your opinion correct, and theirs wrong? Does that make their opinion correct, and yours wrong? Nope to both questions. It is all a matter of whose training and whose experience is evaluating at that particular moment. I proposed moving forward with something new as per request of the original poster. You pretty much called it crap because what I suggested did not fit into your notion, your opinion, that the current established training and experience is the only viable system. You knocked Wynton, a pro with vast symphonic, concert, jazz, blues, experience as not being competent enough to evaluate music GE without your same training on proper sheet interpretation. Think about that. It is a 'this is my apple cart' type opinion where he should be trained to think and evaluate just like you. Well I say reverse it. He and other pros should interp the sheets and train you to think and evaluate like him. Have the judges conform to a more professional opinion of music GE as opposed to academic. That change in subjective opinion of the sheets is what really has your shorts in a wad.

Ding ding ding. They were hoping our professional eyes and ears would automatticly reinfore their established trends. And it backfired on them.

The real reason we were not invited back was actually because we followed their directive. We applied our professional trained experience to their sheets. But instead of reinforcing their ingrained belief of what was correct artistic interpritation, we upset their apple cart. The past judges were well trained and we held them with high regard. But our professional eyes and ears did not fit their preconceived set of opinions, because our professional views did not reinforce the opinions of the establishment over the past decades. It was not due to our incompetence, but due to our artistic subjective evaluation not reinforcing the artistic subjective evaluation of those before us.

Very very very very true. But if you secure like minded, like experienced, like educated; and put them through the exact same training system; you will get judges who hold extremely close opinions. Why do you think it is considered as a vile idea to the established folks for someone to suggest bringing in a non drum corps outsider with no university degree, but does have a vast amount of professional experience with Tower of Power or Blood Sweat & Tears?

I am a judge. Experienced in two associations including UIL. I have been on crews, and have also put crews together. Been that way since the mid 1990's. So let me tell you a true story (which I think I have also told in another thread a while back). A few years ago a rather prominent scholastic competition, one looked at as a major Statewide draw, who had used the same judges pool with certified qualified trained judges for decades, wanted fresh eyes and ears. So they contracted judges with extensive experience, but just not within that State. We were given the sheets in advanced which were Music GE , Music Field, (music judges traded places for finals), Visual GE, Visual Field, (visual judges traded places for finals), Percussion (box prelims and field finals), and Guard (box both prelims and finals), and we were told to apply our own training and experience in order to interpret their sheets. At some point in the past we all had worked with each other, so we were familiar with each other. By the end of the night we judges were pretty much consistent in scores and rankings with each other. Which was also consistent with our experience and training. But OMG most of the perennial top bands were livid!!!! We had placed bands in ranking positions never before seen in that competition. While the bands we gave awards to were overjoyed, only a few had ever received top caption awards before; and our top three overall had never been in the top three. We were not invited back; and the next year the show went back to using the same judges as before. So, you tell me. With our trained and experienced crew, did we provide bad feedback, bad scoring, and bad ranking? Or was it that our trained and experinced evaluations were just different than what they were accustomed to having for all of those previous years?

A) there is a case to be made, especially at Finals, where the execution of the top tier is so high, the spread of the top ensembles is so thin, so subjective, that a gushing review could indeed take less than 1st. B) The term 'bad' is both subjective and opinionated. It depends on who officially gets to determine what is defined as good and what is defined as bad. For example, in a musical passage by a corps, who gets to determine if tight rolls and razor sharp brass or fat rolls and open dark brass (both have their own unique sound distinction) are bad Music GE for that passage? If one GE judge says the rolls need to be tight with razor bright horns, and the other GE judge says fat and dark, who is giving the bad feedback? Remember, same corps, same passage, same caption being judged.

The problem is not the Constitution. It does state, "securing for limited times", leaving the time frame up to Congress. We could debate as to why leaving the time frame open to be set in a law was smart or not, but that is a different subject for a different thread. And while I disagree that the legislators are 'bought' as you put it, the problem is not that corporations like Disney have influence. I see no fault in property owners doing what they can in legal terms in order to retain their own property. You actually typed the real problem. That the public doesn't care enough about this issue to vote in legislators who will balance the time alloted for ownership with opening up arts and sciences to the public domain. By the way, since this is an open based forum, to me opinion is implied unless fact is claimed. But I guess for the sake of others typing IMO may be a necessity.

Maybe that will lesson Gar's fears and tap down some of the overzealous OMG the world is going to implode hyperbole exhibited by others.

It appears to me that the sanctioning body relocted him; sort of like relocating a wayfaring bear.