jwillis35

I don't think having finals in Indianapolis for the next 8 or 9 years is going to hurt DCI that much. Honestly, I can see the point of the OP, but I really doubt people are planning full week-long vacations around DCI Finals. Maybe a short vacation. Indianapolis is a great city, is close to many major cities like Chicago, St. Louis, Cincinnati, Columbus, and even Cleveland and Detroit are not that far away. You have Madison and Milwaukee, and many more. So it's close for a large portion of the Midwestern population. Is it an ideal location for everyone? No. BUt that would never be the case, no matter where yo go. Right now is a difficult time for DCI because the economy is a bigger issue and is certainly hurting show attendance and advanced ticket sales. Yet, I truly believe that DCI may luck out because finals is in Indy, and that a number of people may decide at the last minute to spend a day or two checking out a few of those competitions. I know that I have decided to head out for Semi-Finals. I wish I could stay for Finals, but I have a gig that night. Yet, because Indy is not that far away I can make Friday happen. I would go Thursday but bingo for our local drum corps is a must. Maybe this is just me, but I see vacations in 3 ways: a) some time off from work where you just hang out at home, relax, recharge, work on some other projects, b) the weekend or short vacation where there is a specific agenda (Finals, concert, going to the lake for the weekend, etc.), and c) the week-long or two-week long vacation where you travel to a destination for the purposes of relaxation, family, and the opportunities that destination offers. I am not saying there isn't much to do in Indy, because there is (great city), but most people are not traveling to finals for the "Disney" package that Indy is offering. We are going for DCI, and Indy just happens to be the place.

I think you are absolutely correct here. I don't mind someone presenting the data. I think it's neat to see, and it does have some validity to show creation. But whether it has some validity to judging/scoring a show is entirely opinion. And in terms of how DCI DOES judge shows, this method of analysis is not on the sheets. Show design, content, technique, musicianship, demand, and execution is. Now, you can say this data does relate to demand a bit, and I would not counter that. But otherwise, the other variables of show design are really a matter of creating the best product using the elements that each corps has decided to work with (music, ideas, theme, story).

I think any of the top 6 have shows that could qualify. You really never know. I think SCV will win it. Who knows?

Yes, everyone is giving you the right advice. Just some insight here: "flip4mac" is a plugin that you download from the Microsoft web site. Type "flip4mac" into Google and you will find several places to download the software. It is free. Once downloaded, you install the program and that should do it. It acts as a plugin with Quicktime (not Windows Media Player). Microsoft stopped making WMP for Macintosh a while back, partly because Apple already makes Quicktime (which is vastly superior technology), and Quicktime was so vital as an underpinning to many of the Macintosh's media programs (Logic, Final Cut, Garage Band, iMovie, iPhoto, iDVD, etc.). But in the wacky world of the web, not all technologies are open, and WMP is not as open to the protocol of the Mac OS, so Flip4Mac bridges the gap. Also, and others have pointed this out, it is best to use Safari, especially versions 3 or 4. Version 4 is getting amazing reviews and is very fast and stable. Firefox will try to load the Fan Network within it's own browser instead of calling on Quicktime, so it doesn't work very well. There may be a way to fix that in Firefox, but I haven't found it. Perhaps someone nows how to set that up. Is it in the preferences for plugins? Anyway, hope this helps.

Sometimes I kind of like it when things are all over the place (scores, captions). It means the judges are judging. Often you would see complaints on DCP about how things were too predictable. What we are starting to see, IMO, is the change in status (scores, captions) based on the judges reads as these corps progress through the summer. Just because you were beating someone early means nothing. NOW is a different time, and what happened in June and early July was cool, but no longer applies to NOW. I know many have been saying it, and I will as well: SCV's show is dangerous. REALLY DANGEROUS. Some call it easy, some call it old...I call is classy, beautiful, well designed, and AWESOME! Now, in all fairness, I was not at the show tonight. I know the Cavaliers are still a tall order for SCV. The Cavaliers show is growing on me each time I view portions of it on FN. Originally I did not care for it, but now I really like it, and have this feeling I am going to love it come Finals. They are good, real good. But SCV has a kind of Championship feel to them that only Holy Name Cadets and Blue Devils seem to have. None of the other corps are in this boat if you ask me. HNC still feels like the best lock to win this thing, and BD is already considered a favorite by many, and for good reason. But if one of those two falls a bit, I like SCV or perhaps the Cavaliers. Also, to Crown's credit, their show is amazing and challenging. They have been sick and the flu takes a while to get over. Rehearsals had to be rough for about a week, and now they add a new ending (not sure why, I liked it the other way), and they have likely lost some steam. They need to clean and purge some of the demand that is holding them back. Let's see how they respond.

Well, you never know. The judges are pretty good and they were there. But if you're calling BS, you may need the phone number: 1-666-bul-crap

They did it once, and they learned their lesson. To do a quality product would take time and money...a lot of money. It's just not cheap. Too much overhead, and recording in San Antonio for instance would provide plenty of problems. In addition, not many people bought the mid-season DVDs in the past (I think they did them in 2001 as well, not sure about other years). But the whole venture was not making money. People end up making a decision, either buy now (mid season) or buy later (Finals). Later is always better (production and performance). Couple all this with the fact that we live in a download culture where the entertainment comes to us via internet. I really don't want DVDs to permanently archive a mid season show that I saw live via a web cast and have been watching via VOD ever since. No need to keep that media in my house when DCI can keep it online for me, and I can access that media whenever I wish, as long as I have a membership to Fan Network. Less clutter! No, the quality is not as good as a DVD, but I don't need that for a mid-season show. I just need a fix every once in a while (corps style). Finals DVD are about the only ones I will consider, and even then I do not buy every year.

Madison Scouts on so many occasions that it's hard to name them all. It is interesting that they were the masters of entertainment, and often their shows had no theme or story. Here are some years: 1988 - no theme, just great music and drill. 1989 - no theme, see above 1990 - Lemon Squeeze. Interesting show, but really no theme, just music and drill 1991 and 1992: City of Angels, but really not a theme show, the title was just letting you know they were doing music from that show 1993: same 1994: same 1995 and 1996: A Drum Corps Fan's Dream, Part I and II - no theme, just music and motion And when they did a theme show, like 1997's "Pirates of Lake Mendota" or 1999's "Jesus Christ Superstar," they did not try to tell a story, or to be too literal with the theme. They simply presented images of those stories. They gave you impressionism over story telling. It worked very well. Most of their shows are what I call Style Shows. This type of show presents a musical style, perhaps featuring music of a composer, a musical genre, or by mixing the elements a bit and selling the show through excellent arrangement and drill. I'd say their shows worked well. Blue Devils 1986 is another example. Just flat out great music and drill. Or BD 1988. No theme, just great music. The Cavaliers are masters at not really doing a theme but a style. Obviously their show this year is a bit more theme-based, but take 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003. Those shows simply featured a style, only in this case the style was visual with music arranged to match the visual. Think about it: what is the theme to Spin Cycle, or Four Corners? The idea there was to sell a style of visual presentation and to match music to it perfectly. They were brilliant designs!

All I know is I was laughing my arse off after reading the OP's comments. I think the sarcasm was evident, and I bet you he enjoyed a good bit of the show. But some of the points he brings up are very valid, and with some things said I think you just need to laugh it off and realize that in many cases he is not really serious--even if he says so. I agree about the rim shots, I actually love what many of the pits are doing this year (so we differ there), but I think you hit some good points, in an exaggerated sort of way, with a hint of humor and sarcasm. Yeah, I can see some being offended, but you can't please everyone and not everyone laughs at the same things. I do think we should move this to the World Class discussion board and title it "Rim Shots and Other Effects." Then I think we should have a more serious discussion about effects, but perhaps with a sense of humor and new ideas.

Oh yeah, Cadets ending is awesome. And there whole show is awesome! I love it. But I want a Z-pull that moves out (Zingali), then an S-Pull that pulls back in (Sylvester), and finally a double pull (Z and S) ripped across the field at 240 BPM while the horns are blazin' away. But maybe...maybe I ask for too much.

Actually, your show was not the one I was referring to. I did like the Bluecoats "Beatles" show. It has issues, but I think everyone new that music would be tough to sell. But the corps was good! I was referring to Phantom, who I love as a corps, and always will. But they really tanked on finals night in 1992 and it was, IMO, disappointing to see such a talented corps nose-dive like that.

I Completely agree with this. It has nothing to do with whether or not a show has a theme. It has evereything to do with content and how it is designed and projected. I tend to divide shows into 3 groups: 1. Story Shows = the specific telling of a story or the desire to specifically take an audience from point A to point Z with all the dots connected in some way (Phantom 2008, Cadets 2007, Cadets 2006?, Cadets 2005, others) 2. Theme Shows = A show about something, someone, or some place. The show is more of a representation of the ideas of that theme, the impressions and character of that idea, without actually telling us the literal story. These shows present images of a theme or idea or type. (Garfield 1984, SCV 1988, Blue Devils 1997, Madison 1997 & 1999, Cavaliers 2009). The Cavaliers this year are not telling a story, they are setting an image and impression of mountain climbing and they are doing so really well. 3. Style Shows = these are shows that use a musical style or a visual style to sell the product. They can be a composer style (Bernstein, Copland), a genre style (jazz, classical), a visual style (dance, ballet, speed), and they generally allow the music or visual to really sell the mood. The Cadets this year are not telling the story of West Side Story, nor are they really presenting a theme (images of WSS, like they did in 1984). They are using music and motion to sell the goods. The style is music and motion, and they are nailing it. To me, No. 1 is the most difficult to bring to an audience. Phantom was masterful last year, but in many cases this is the most difficult to pull off. No. 2 (theme shows) are much better, but the difficulty is in using the right images, presenting content in a way that it is understandable and readable. No. 3 is the easiest to sell. Think Cadets 2003, "My Favorite Things." People see the title and think "Theme." But there was no theme. The title was to simply let you know that these songs are some of their favorite drum corps hits. One made famous by SCV, one by Madison, one by Garfield. The music drove the entire show, with visual adding. It was a hit, took 3rd at Finals. Madison Scouts have always been the kings of this kind of thing. A Drum Corps Fans Dream, Part I and II were great shows. No theme, just music, Madison style. The crowd went nuts for both. End of story! I think a corps can choose to do what they wish, and they should have that freedom, but this only illustrates what I think the demands are, and to me Theme Shows and Style Shows are the best and generally work better for audiences.

You'll notice that most of my comments are more general and when I do use specifics I try not to identify a corps in a manner that is too negative. I have to be careful with the Bluecoats in particular. But I would be naive if I said I hadn't seen the reviews on Bluecoats and their show, including many comments made by those watching live webcasts and VOD. They are what they are: a great group of performers with a show theme that was more difficult to sell than they probably thought when originally designing the show. I believe they are re-working the ending once again, but as with any show it is really difficult to sell a complicated product to the masses. This is not just a Bluecoats issue, but one for many of the corps. The more complicated and sophisticated we become, the more difficult it is to project those ideas to the audience (especially when 30 to 50 yards away), who may or may not know what WE know. And they could care less! They just want to be entertained. Typically the Bluecoats are one of the best at giving an audience what they want. Last year's Boxer show was FANtastic, and 2007 was an amazing group of performers. 2006 was fun, and 2005 was super exciting. So with the Bluecoats, and I know I am biased, I tend to give them a bit of artistic license for this one year, hoping that this will lead to better things and more of what they have always given to the masses. The music is wonderful to listen to, but I will admit that the show theme has not been projected nearly as well as fans would like. That is obvious by the reactions of the fans, especially those on DCP. Hey, those opinions are always welcome and I know the staff of the Bluecoats will not stop looking for ways to entertain, so do count 'em out of finding those tweaks for this show, and you know they will have something great planned for next year.

I completely agree with you here. And sometimes I think people misunderstand this issue, even show designers. Nobody is saying that drum corps fans are dumb or lazy people not willing to do some research. This is not the issue and never has been. The issue is time, schedule, marketing, cost, operation, and design. Let me explain: Time = the time the average fan has (not DCPers) to prep for a show (if there is such a thing: ShowPrep). Schedule = the average fans working schedule and the difficulty in finding time to attend a show, plus the WANT or NEED to attend a show--which is largely affected by corps doing shows that people enjoy marketing = DCI's, and the corps', ability to reach the market (the fan) with schedule info, even show information, deals, etc. Cost = a driving force in whether or not people can afford to attend a show, but also whether DCI and the drum corps can afford to continue their operations. It is easier to justify cost when your product is highly desirable. Apple Inc. has enjoyed sort of an anomaly during this economy largely due to highly desirable products (iPhone, iPod Touch, iMac). A few other companies have enjoyed this as well. So even in a down market, people were willing to pay to get the product. The existence of DCI depends on selling the product. Operation = How the corps operate within the structure of DCI, and how this structure is presented to the fans/market must be carefully aligned and a strategy must be evident (at least at the upper levels). This strategy must be about selling tickets, increasing attendance, providing a product that is entertaining and high quality, but knowing full well that this product is being provided for fans who have all kinds of tastes, and who have busy schedules and not a lot of "prep time" for a show. Design = The Art of Drum Corps Show Creation. When we go to a theater to see a movie, the movie is roughly 2 hours long and has a bit more time to tell a story. More elements can be used in that movie to enhance the realism, and the cost of production is vastly more than what DCI makes in an entire year. When we walk into a museum of art, we have time to stare at a painting, or other forms of art, for as long as we wish. We can read about it. When we go to an orchestra concert, a jazz concert, a wind ensemble concert, we get a program with notes and all. We know what they are playing, why they are playing it, and some information about the music and composer. *When we go to a drum corps show, we get none of this. Yes, we can buy a program, but usually they only offer up ads, a quick bio on the corps, and a brief list of songs they are playing. There is not much to go on, and buying the program is optional. We have no idea of story line, or theme, or what is behind that theme, and we have no clue about the elements in the show and how they are to make us feel or what they stand for. YET...designers of these shows often create a product that needs a serious set of program notes. And the problem with drum corps is that the show flies by so fast. You have 11.5 minutes to try and understand 3 or 4 musical arrangements that had to be cut, chopped, and pasted into a new, shorter song. And in that music you have a drill that is flying by at seemingly 90MPH, yet somehow you are supposed to identify all the elements and stories behind this piece of "art." This is why it is important to program a show with simple, effective entertainment elements that anyone can understand and grab onto, and then mix that with some sophistication when possible. But this is easier said than done. At what point does the Art get in the way of Profit? We are not a museum or art gallery. I don't have the answers, but I know that these are the things DCI and the corps must address so that fans are happy, willing to attend shows, and yet we can still move the platform forward and be innovative.

First off, nice post by the OP. If electronics are not your thing, or narration, vocals, and what have you, that's perfectly understandable. There have been changes, and not all of them have been with unanimous approval--quite the contrary. That bass player for Spirit is excellent, and on a general note I am hearing lots of good things coming out of the pits this year. I actually like the inclusion of the synth and all, much more than vocals and narration. What I think works well is sounds clips (like Cadets have in Cool), some well-written synth effects, some electric bass/synth bass (if well orchestrated in appropriate spots), and the merging of all these new sounds. For me personally, I removed myself from the need to have drum corps be only about brass, drums, and marching many years ago. The guards are so much more integrated (although, this at times presents problems), and there is a lot we can do without taking too much away from the base elements. There is no doubt these changes will bother some, perhaps even chase some away, but for me, personally, I am really enjoying the colors and sounds that are being achieved. I think too much narration is probably the only thing that bothers me.

Oh, I can live without the visual from the 70s and 80s if I had to. There is no doubt in my mind that we have made progress in the visual department. Music is another matter, at least for me. Perhaps this is because of the visual demands. I was around in the 70s, seeing my first live show in 79. I have liked all the eras (70s, 80s, 90s, and 2000s). The 80s is probably my favorite, but mainly because of the musical books. Music is generally my focus, so the 80s just rocks in my world. The 90s was probably a good mix of music and visual, but honestly it's not my favorite. I actually like the 2000s better, and maybe even the 70s. Some interesting things happened in the 90s. 1. We continued to lose some good drum corps, 2. the issues with show design (esoteric designs were a plenty), 3. Too many corps were going to DARK uniforms and some wacky designs, and 4. the visual designs were getting better but the music was getting choppy or effect based. Here in the 2000s the music has started to revert a bit, although sometimes these drill designs can get out of hand. But the combination of drill and music is much better now than in the 90s IMO. Having said that, 1992 was one of the best DCI World Finals, with about 11 out of 12 shows that year sporting amazing products.

Most memorable minutes, or there-a-bouts: 1. 1987 Garfield Cadets: the closing from the company front to the end is just classic drum corps that will never die (see SCV 2009) 2. Madison Scouts 1995: last minute or so. The crowd went nuts, the show was amazing, and the corps was hot. 3. SCV 1988: last minute of Phantom of the Opera. Absolutely beautiful, powerful, riveting, and wonderful. 4. Star of Indiana 1991: last minute, Zingali just doing his thing, and man was that amazing. In terms of drill, this was the best last minute EVER!!!!!!!!! When you first saw the cross to cross move you just couldn't believe it. I haven't seen anything like that since. 5. Garfield Cadets 1984: The mellophone solo in I Have A Love (Barbara Maroney I think). Simply the best ever, the best arrangement of that song for field, and the performance and drill were riveting. Interestingly enough, I heard a neat interview with Wayne Downey of the Blue Devils (done not that long ago) and he was telling a story of how when he first saw this show (Garfield 84), he went back to his staff and said "we're screwed." Of course, the ending of Garfield 1984 is also one of my favorites ALL TIME!

It's not a bad suggestion. I doubt it will happen. Sometimes I think the staff is more interested in their design than they are in the students learning and performing. But that's an observation of mine that I know is unfounded (well, not totally). Years ago when I did this sort of thing with some competitive bands, I would see a number of talented caption heads, on many occasions, speaking with judges in a manner more suggestive of "my product" and "my creation" and "my show design." They were more worried about how "their" art was being perceived by the judges than whether the kids could perform it, and whether the crowd could understand it. One of the reasons many folks miss the old TIC system is that it concentrated more on member performance. I would not be totally against doing this: Judge 5 Core Captions: 1) Brass 2) Percussion 3) Guard 4) Marching 5) General Effect Under brass you have a) construction b) technique c) demand (2 judges; field [[technique only]] and box [[construction and demand]]); brass = 20 points Under percussion you have the same thing (2 judges; field and box--same as above); percussion = 20 points Under guard you have a) design b) technique c) demand (1 judge - box, low); guard = 20 points Under marching you have a) technique b) demand (2 judges, field and box); marching = 20 points For GE you have a) construction b) integration (1 judge, box); GE = 20 points This would dramatically change the priority of how scores are applied, but the judging elements are still much the same. You simply do not have the subjective nature of GE music, GE visual, or the overall Visual caption. There is one GE caption, and it is judged by one person. That person simply uses two sub-classes to determine the score (construction and integration). Their score ultimately reflects the show's general ability to reach its potential and the crowd in a logical way. How well it does this will depend on execution of the performance captions and whether or not the design is good.

The Cavaliers have always been a high class organization. I would expect nothing less from them. And we just don't see a corps hit 75 years of age all too often. Even within the competitive season, this is something to truly celebrate. Here's hoping for 75 more Cadets!!!

Great responses by all, and excellent post by the OP. As humans we are naturally going to see things differently when it comes to something as complicated as a drum corps show. Our response to a show is largely conditional, and those conditions are variables, such as: 1. Favorite corps 2. style we enjoy 3. show design 4. excellence 5. fairness 6. competitive status and desire 7. what others think 8. the judging system and how the sheets are used and developed 9. individual judges 10. and more Any number of these variables can be coupled, almost instantly, that might give us a reaction to a show. As someone said earlier, if a person tells us corps A is amazing, we are intrigued and tend to watch corps A with baited breath. In one way we are excited to see what they see, but we also wish to make up our own mind, and we may watch corps A looking for a weakness that perhaps our friend didn't see. The later is really true when corps A is not our favorite corps (no. 1). When our favorite corps is not scoring well, our first inclination is to question that result. Check it, assess it, and then make our own observation. After all, we are rooting for them, win or not. If the corps in front of them has a remarkable design, at least as determined by the judges and even many fans, chances are we will question that show to some extent because we are competitive (no. 6) and we do want our corps to move up. Inherently, I believe we recognize when a show is good, either from design or performance, or both, and I believe all DCPers know when a corps has the potential to score high and place well. Whether we come out and admit that is one thing, and how we couple the variables and then prioritize determines our stance. Sometimes people may feel a corps, favorite or not, is not getting a fair shake by the judges, or that perhaps the system (sheets and their design) is not rewarding an otherwise really good corps. One thing that my mother taught me many years ago, and that stays with me to this day, is that what we find entertaining isn't all natural, but that it can be educated and fortified through research and knowing what to look for. Of course, we all have natural inclinations, the things that just naturally make us say wow, or tap our toes, or clap our hands. That is certainly the natural part of the entertainment variable. The educated part is in learning the style, knowing what went into it, and learning the various skills needed to perform at that level. Example: My mother and I went to a band night many moons ago. Most of the bands were average, with some being show bands, one was a scrambler band, a swing band, and a military style group. There was one group that was a quasi corps style-military show, and they were just excellent. On the way home I knew that the corps style group was my favorite, but I didn't know any of the music, the show theme was unfamiliar to me, and really my natural instincts were not wowed (something that would result in clapping, humming, or tapping my toes). Other bands played far more popular music, and some had show themes that were really fun. But that corps style band was what I remembered most and really did like. My mom then said to me, "remember, Jon, that excellence, in and of itself, is a form of entertainment." Although many do not find the Blue Devils to be their favorite corps, and there have been many on this forum who routinely do not like the Devils, I do believe they see that excellence, and, even in some small way, they are entertained by it. Are they willing to go on record when a placement is on the line and their favorite corps, or a style they like, is competing head-on with BD? That's another argument. The Blue Devils have never been my favorite corps, but I never fail to be entertained by them, because I see exactly what it is they do, and boy do they do it well. In other words, watching young men and women marching straight lines, demanding curves and floats, playing precisely and musically, and doing it so well...when I see this I am thrilled just by the maneuvers and the excellence in sound. That alone is an EXCITER, which is a reaction to the action. But I have this feeling that it is easy to suppress and "exciter" when other variables are coupled and prioritized. We can make ourselves believe what we want to, and this is one example of how that is done. When variables overshadow reactions, those reactions are put aside. Think of the reaction as the "inner thought." This is the real impression one gets at first glance or after careful viewing. But many of us do not offer up that opinion. Sometimes because we want another viewing, and other times because we have already used the conditional variables, albeit unconsciously, and we have given ourselves a reason to doubt what we just witnessed. Obviously I am dissecting it too much. Basically, we will believe what we want and our personal needs (as affected by conditional variables) will be our top priority. The judging is only one part, and most people do not pick a favorite based on judging. After all, only one can win, but they are all winners in a very true sense. But judging does have an effect on preference, especially when it comes to beating a competitor, choosing a style you like over one you do not, rooting for the corps that you think is being unfairly judged, and so on. Being completely OBJECTIVE means ignoring conditional variables and leaning more heavily on REACTION (the exciters, performance excellence, what truly constitutes good design). And that reaction must be guided, educated, assessed, and continually upgraded. In this case reaction is both instant (first impression) and educated (knowing what to look for). That is the objective view. I would like to think I can be objective in reviews, but I am sure it's more subjective because I know conditional variables are strong determinants. It's like the "Force," my favorites have to do well and that's that!! :-) JW

I agree with others. It is not the instruments. Look at what the Cadets played on in the 80s. Check out the videos (online "someplace") of Garfield 1987. Those instruments should have hurt music and visual. What pieces of junk, yet the Cadets made them sound fantastic. These Jupiter horns are pretty good. The deal to use them was likely a wise decision by Phantom. They may be getting them for free. Who knows! Jupiter may want Phantom to demo the horns and then will make money when hundreds of programs start to use their line (if this happens). And I figure over time this will happen. So Phantom becomes the lead marketer, and they save big bucks and still play good horns. Judging from what I heard at San Antonio, I like them. Their brass sounds great, and I must say they have one of the most demanding horn books on the field. If it is not the most demanding, it is certainly up there with Cadets and Crown and BD. The main thing to consider here is this: show ideas and construction. When ideas (the planning stage) and construction (the process of building) do not pan out, the show, no matter how good the performers, will not sell and score to its fullest. It's not the end of the world, and it's just a competition. It's not life and death. For whatever reasons, Phantom's show just didn't pan out. The members are great, but the design is flawed. Most designs in drum corps are flawed to a certain extent, and it's just a matter of edits, tweaks, re-writes, and cleaning. I say this because, regardless of what people think, when you design for field, you are talking about taking music that needs to be arranged (even shortened) to fit a set time, and taking ideas that need to be staged outdoors on a field much larger than an indoor stage. The elements are not perfect, so writing for those elements and variables can be tricky. Even the best design teams make mistakes, choose difficult themes and approaches that sometimes just don't pan out. We on DCP sit around and play arm-chair general and talk in terms of what we would like to see and what we would do. The only problem is this: we are not doing it, they are! I only say that because this whole process REALLY IS HARD. Our understanding is needed, and we have to remove ourselves from the stubborn nature in us that says "darn it, I am a Phantom Phan and they should always be good and score high and be top 3, and, and, and..." Although I am exaggerating, there are those that think this way. We all want some new faces in the top 5, but when they come at the expense of our favorite corps...well, now someone is going to pay. "New faces are good as long as they don't beat 'MY' corps." But guess what? The law of creation and competition is catching up to a number of traditional powers, and this year it's Phantom. They could pull into 7th, but that might be the highest they can get at this point.

Interesting ideas. The "Top 12" is so engrained in peoples heads, especially young marchers, that it would be hard to tell those 10th to 12th place corps right now that they are no longer making finals. I know we are not doing this, but even if it were to happen in future years it really changes the equation. But I also agree that the top 12 has lost some of its significance, With around 22 World Class corps, I might be best to do this: 1. Quarterfinals: Top 22 perform 2. Semi-Finals: Top 14 from Quarters, plus Open Class Championships top 3 corps (and they get to go on in the order of 3,2,1). The 3rd place Open Corps goes on just before the first intermission, then the 2nd place Open Corps just before the 2nd intermission, and then the Open Champion plays after the show before scores. 3. Finals: Top 8, plus the Marine Drum & BC, DCI HOF Inductions, and some good entertainment for pre-show (like a rock group, concert band, jazz group, something like that). Playoff: A playoff should only occur if the scores warrant it. If the 1st place corps after regulation was up by 1.2, it is simply not fair to give another corps a shot at something they have rightfully won. Now, if the scores are ties, then I love the idea of having the 2 or 3 corps that tie (and it would likely be no more than two) come back 30 minutes later and go at it.

I know that it is important to keep all shows alive, and nobody wants this show to die (and I am certain DCI does not want it to die). But DCI has a job to do, and the Cavaliers already have two shows in the Chicagoland region. If push came to shove, DCI would put more weight behind the Lake Highlands show because that coupled with Houston are like mini-regionals, and San Antonio being a true regional. Having said that, DCI wants all these shows to succeed, I am sure of it. To me, it's a no brainer. Why not have 3 shows in the Dallas region instead of two, or one? I think a metro of that size can support 3 DCI shows, and it should be able to. So I believe the economy is likely a reason seats were not filled this year. Keep in mind they were not filled for the second night of Lake Highland, and Houston also seemed less packed. It is a sign of the times. In the future, however, I see this working. When the economy picks up, having 3 shows in the Dallas region will be nice. I know I would be attending at least two of the three, if not all three every year. If you were not attending San Antonio, and you were not going to finals or elsewhere, those 3 shows would be it. Not a bad 3 nights either.

I agree with show design. Whether a corps plans to tell a story, present a theme, or just present a style based on music, the main thing for me is integration of those ideas and logically moving from point A to Z. The Cavaliers masterful designs over the years come to mind. The Cadets, when they are on (like this year) come to mind. The Blue Devils are very good at this, and the Madison Scouts back in the day used to just make a show move from beginning to end like nobody's business. SCV's show flows so smoothly and beautifully this year that it may very well be my favorite show of the summer, and it has a seemingly perfect blend of music and visual that both video viewing and audio listening will be very enjoyable. Some corps just throw around demand like it's a design feature and it clutters their show and hides the true content. Demand is not design but a tool. That "tool" coupled with good design can be amazing (see Cadets and Cavaliers), but in general demand gets overdone, and because of this there are a lot of shows that just can't say what they need to. On a more specific note, I tend to like less story telling and more thematic shows or shows based on a musical style (composer, genre). What Blue Devils are doing this year is amazing. 1930 is not a story but a theme. They don't have to worry about starting some detailed story from the beginning to the end. What they are doing is creating images, reflections, impressions of 1930, and that tends to work better for field. Theme shows, if done well (IMO) tend to be impressionistic, but in a very clear way. What Phantom Regiment attempted and succeeded at last year was simply amazing. They did tell a story. Spartacus was not a theme show but a real story, and they pulled it off. Generally, though, this type of show is more difficult. They are struggling with Red Violin this summer. Cadets struggled with their 2008 show, and certainly 2006. They managed to pull it off in 2005, but again, I think that is rare. When SCV did "Phantom of the Opera" they did not try to tell the story. They created images from the story, throwing little snippets of the storyline into the show, but mostly using impressions of the story. It was a theme show, not a story, and that is why it was a classic. Garfield's version of West Side Story in 1984 (maybe my all-time favorite) is the same deal. It was a thematic show, not a story, as they really allowed the music to lead the viewer, and then let the visual enhance the images or impressions the music was creating. The Madison Scouts are one of the best examples of a corps using a "Style Show" to perfection. Back in the 70s, 80s, and 90s, these guys were the sheer definition of entertainment in drum corps. Their shows did not try to force a story on you, and often not even a theme. Usually what they did was present a "Style." This could be the music of a composer, or a genre of music (jazz, latin, etc.), and then they would weave the visual program into the musical score and they would sell the show from a coordination standpoint (visual enhancing music, and music driving the design and entertainment value). And when Madison did present more of a theme show, like "Pirates of Lake Mendota" or "Jesus Christ Superstar," they did so by not trying to tell a story but by creating images, impressions, and perhaps by creating short stories within a theme and, again, letting the music drive the action (visual/design). I watch some of these shows today and think to myself "I just can't follow this." When I really analyze it, the reasons I can't are as follows: 1. Trying to do a story and can't sell it, or they didn't design it well, or there is too much to tell and not enough time to tell it. 2. Trying to do a theme show, but treating it like a story (I think this is the Bluecoats problem this year). "Imagine" is really a theme, an idea, but they are treating it like a story and there are too many additives in the "story" that nobody in the audience can really get. The corps is magnificent as performers, but the design is flawed, and ultimately this hurts entertainment (and score). I do love their music. 3. Trying to do a theme show but overusing "tools" like demand instead of first fortifying the show with logical design. 4. trying to do a style show but taking the music and visual too seriously and trying to project a theme or story when all they need to do is sell the music. In 2003 the Cadets used no theme, no story, and really no style. They simply called the show "My Favorite Things" and all they really did was sell the music. It worked, and they were top 3. Not bad! Sometimes when corps try to do a style they take it way to seriously and forget to just SELL the music. The Blue Devils are masterful at selling the music. Madison in the 70s, 80s, 90s are a perfect example of SELLING the music. These are the things I notice.

Some of this was snipped for brevity, but this was very well written, and I agree. The "What", as stated above, is Content, and the "How" is execution. Some categories are judges a bit different, but this is the idea. Content is important because it contains a long list of important variables, such as: demand, for sure but also design, coordination, projection of idea or concept to top box, and so on. In the area of GE Vis and MUS for instance, content is very important. Although content may contain a sub-area like demand, the more important factors are design, coordination, ability to project the theme or show instance to the box, to logically present the material in a manner conducive to what happened before it and after it in order to allow the show to flow better. Demand is in the sheets, and each judge may use it differently, but ultimately being clean with a well-programmed show is more important. From that point you can add demand if you wish. People have often complained that the Blue Devils are boring or that they do not put out shows that are as entertaining as others. They have complained that their demand, especially in visual and GE, is just not there. BUT.... The Blue Devils know how to program a show, whether you like it or not, that flows logically, grabs your attention, connects the dots, highlights all of their strengths, and moves well from beginning to end. Their 1930 show this year is a classic example. Some like it, some do not, but the show is readable. It is logical. All the elements are combined well, showcased well. Their drill alone is certainly not Cadets or Cavaliers, and it's probably not as hard as SCV's drill, but BD's drill is good enough within the confines of all the other elements. It makes sense, it presents the sections the way they need it to, without cluttering things up for the sake of demand only. Their drill helps them feature their musical book and the musical effect, perhaps better than most, if not all. The Cavaliers are masters at using their visual to drive their effect, the Blue Devils use a different method, but one that also works--they use their visual to drive the music, which in turn drives the effect. And the Blue Devils use COLOR brilliantly. All this dark crap on the field is pointless. I remember all the corps going DARK in the 90s and thinking to myself WHY? The activity needs COLOR. COLOR sells, it flatters, it fascinates, it helps to project ideas and music. I am always reminded, when watching these show, just how dark some of these corps are, and you really can't see the effects. The saying used to be that you had to hide the dirt, yet three of the brightest corps on the field are what we often refer to as the Big 3 or Elite 3. Yes, Cavaliers and BD use dark pants, but their tops are bright green or blue. BD has white and silver mixed in, with fabulous guard outfits and bright yellow projecting throughout the show. LOVE IT!! The Cadets march cream pants, have those beautiful bright maroon tops, and bright white slashes with a very bright yellow/gold cumber bun. Their guard also used color brilliantly. COLOR COLOR COLOR with all the top corps, then somehow, and for some reason, we get everyone else saying that they must go DARK. Anyway, now that I have ranted about color, let me say again that demand is just one part, but if the show is not well crafted and performed, WHO CARES? I don't want to just watch demand. The wonderful thing about the Cadets this year is that they have great construction of show, with some tweaks needed, and they also have demand. The Cavaliers have great construction of show (although I wasn't sure at first reading), and they have demand, and they are pretty clean. And BD has great construction, fun music, and they are clean. If you want to paint a great work of art, you first start with a base. Everything else falls on top of that base. If the base product sucks, no amount of sprinkles and candy on top of it will save it. The base must be there from the beginning, and that has nothing to do with demand. It has everything to do with logical show construction!