One n Done

I think more folks will agree with elements of the post above as the top 6 go head to head in the coming weeks. Content is not top 3, musically. Concept is not deep, nor terribly compelling. Having seen it once, I don’t have a burning need to again. YMMV. However, the concept is obvious and story handled well and clearly. Content is appropriate for this group and achievement is strong. It is a smart, pleasing vehicle that continues to demonstrate competence and keeps the Crusaders on their upward trajectory. Though probably not a winner this year, It’s in sight if this group keeps doing what they have the past two years. IMO competition for 4-6 this year is every bit as interesting as that for 1-3.

Highlights for me: Bluecoats low tessitura trumpet solo work. Done very well and unique as a design piece. Very cool. Crown’s battery writing and their dynamic contrast. Not afraid to play very softly. They play clean. Liked the space in the writing, not just a fistful of notes. Crown’s brass sound. And then to present non show material in an encore at such a high level of quality-awesome.

Weeeellll....Front ensembles are about double the size they were 25 years ago and they are amplified. Instruments requiring amplification are in that front ensemble. Singers that have to be amplified are also in widespread use. Front ensemble contribution has exploded as far as content in their writing. Meanwhile, brass lines are 10-16 players larger, but certainly haven’t doubled in size, nor has the battery. Some groups are pretty unabashed about creating GE with the volume knob. So, field mikes for more ensembles are the result. Doing the electronic thing well is tough. Two groups get it right almost every year....Bloo and BD. I think with these two teams it’s about more than the wattage and volume knob. It’s also about a team of designers that compromise and put their ego to the side for the good of the whole. It takes musicianship and maturity to create and balance a product so that ensemble texture has clarity while also impactful without being deafening in this era of the speaker stack. I’m ok with amplification and field mikes. Used tastefully, creatively and not all the time, they can contribute positively.

And there’s reasons most do. Audiences appreciate WELL CONSTRUCTED and performed tweaks. Honestly, the members also get a charge out of learning something new after several weeks of cleaning. The trick is that the rest of the show has to be “right”, and staff and students can’t have spent much of their summer already making up for poor design choices and implementation.

Regarding Madison’s recent popularity/competitive results the things I first question are design, instruction, facilities, travel. Which, these days, means money. Look at Boston for what an injection of money can do. Similarly, think back to Star. Are the Scouts doing all they MUST to be fiscally competitive enough to produce an engaging product for ANY audience (not just alumni)? Not all they can....all they must. Prior to altering their all male status, the money has to be there. Yes, having females would more easily fill spots and get dues paid. But, as far as funding to consistently be excellent, dues are but a fraction. With the above having been said, I support ALL groups being Co-ed. Aside from being able to draw on the musical/artistic talents of the other 50% of the human race, there’s other aspects to look at. Some of the toughest and most supportive members I’ve known were female. Some of the best leaders I’ve seen were female. It takes more than chops, spinning and dance to be a strong unit. I’d want access to every person I could towards that end.

No sir, I have shared my displeasure about a small group within this community based on their own choices about certain topics in this public forum. You need not share my opinion, just as I need not share yours.

Mr. Schehr- like plenty of others here, I imagine, I haven’t had a job in the past 30 years that didn’t require fingerprints, background checks, or drug testing. I am all for protecting the staff, volunteers, and members who perform for us every Summer. Since you asked: 1. Every corps should be in compliance with their state’s requirement’s for child care workers. In addition, since there is interaction between groups from differing states, FBI background checks should be mandatory. Compliance means anyone traveling with the corps must clear the checks. Drivers, instructors, medical, food prep, admin., AND members. 2. Reporting-Predators smartly choose those who can be bullied, and do so in an environment where victims do not have an easy, trusted, objective source to share their story. It is hard enough for victims to relive terrifying and demeaning experiences by coming forward. The corps(s) should have an independent agency for complaints of harassment and abuse. It should be a source that is trained in objectively and carefully collecting these complaints. 3. Confidentiality-Victims AND the accused deserve protection given the serious nature of these reports. BOTH can be indirectly and even innacurately harmed in the court of public opinion. Especially early on in the process when precious few, if any, have the facts to pass judgement. When a report/complaint is received, the accused, depending on severity and position ( staff vs. member), may need to leave the unit for a time. Regarding number 3 above, it is the court of public opinion and the nature of SOME of the commentary here that has me less than pleased with a handful of folks. It should be possible to protect the activity without some of the careless and even malicious commentary tossed around here. It isn’t about protecting offenders or helping them hide. It’s about protecting ANY that may be innocent. Sexual abuse, or abuse of a minor, are such heinous acts that careers and lives get wrecked long BEFORE the accused sees a courtroom-guilty or not. I think there are more shoes to yet to drop in the coming months. It is okay to feel angry and disgusted when reports of this nature surface. Our reaction however is a choice and I believe we should be as thoughtful as we are vigilant.

THIS!

Yes, Please.

From what I understand, two of the former board members had been serving for less than a year when this came to light. One of them just 6 months. Another, a lawyer, evidently lost his job with his firm due simply to his position on the BOD once the news broke. It WAS correct that the former board be replaced, for multiple reasons. It’s simpler, and perhaps more satisfying for some, to lump things together and burn all in effigy. The truth probably runs along the lines that a couple of them knew or strongly suspected that GH was dirty and absolutely didn’t do what they could and should have done. Similarly, it is likely that a portion of them were not aware and were there with the best of intentions and a clean conscience. None of this excuses the abuses that took place, nor the former board’s initial tone deaf response to the story breaking. But, there were decent and well meaning people among that group that were hurt. While nowhere near as awful as what the women abused have suffered, the collateral damage to many others in the organization has been real and painful. The new board looks to be off to a good start. They have shown transparency, purpose, and compassion. Would that we all could do so as well.

Truth, yes. Rage and indignation, not so much.

So, you think this is FUN? Some may not feel that way too much longer.

Mostly. But, some may find difficulty putting the genie back in the bottle.

Some of you choose to PUBLISH some fairly damaging stuff about individuals based on incomplete facts, inaccuracies, and the vehemence of your own ideals and beliefs. Good luck with that.