Star of Indiana 1993

[84BDsop]

wait... one more...

i'll fix my post...

they resigned from the activity. they lost.

...shall always be.

The elected to leave of their own accord before the season even started to persue something different....hardly losing. You are wrong....flat out, simply wrong.

They decided their own fate and have been just a little bit successful at doing so....get over it.

[PR_ducky]

I recognize 93 Stars talent and excellent performance skills, and that they had a very difficult book, but man that show just put me to sleep.

This argument is sort of like the movie "The English Patient"

either you thought it was a masterpiece, or the most boring thing ever.

[Jeffe77]

I recognize 93 Stars talent and excellent performance skills, and that they had a very difficult book, but man that show just put me to sleep.

This argument is sort of like the movie "The English Patient"

either you thought it was a masterpiece, or the most boring thing ever.

:troll food:

[Fastone]

I recognize 93 Stars talent and excellent performance skills, and that they had a very difficult book, but man that show just put me to sleep.

This argument is sort of like the movie "The English Patient"

either you thought it was a masterpiece, or the most boring thing ever.

That's a pretty accurate statement. I loved that show while some people I know hated it. I also thought based on the sheets the Cadets deservedly won by a tenth.

[Lance]

Good to see people who don't get into the show at least still appreciate its content and the kids' achievement.

It's still the show that gets the most visceral reaction from me, top to bottom, of any in dci history.

[Medeabrass]

I recognize 93 Stars talent and excellent performance skills, and that they had a very difficult book, but man that show just put me to sleep.

This argument is sort of like the movie "The English Patient"

either you thought it was a masterpiece, or the most boring thing ever.

This kinda' makes me laugh cuz' I happen to like "The English Patient." lol...Do I have to turn in my "Man Card" now?

[DCIHasBeen]

They clearly outperformed a much more progressive, difficult and interesting program than ANY corps that year and the few following. What a presentation! Simply brilliant.

as to this thread...this is most likely one of the most discussed drum corp shows ever...I know from the percussion standpoint, it is regarded as a one-off unique and sterling book/ performance, hence why they won percussion almost with perfect score (finals wasnt perfect...but pre-lims was!)

The Star guard and visual package? no one had anything on them in show concept and design...i wasnt in the press box or field evaluating...so that tenth of a point that they needed is a mystery to me...I still get the feeling, it was manipulated.

Cadets were much flatter, not sloppy, but ditier...maybe if they had a few more weeks with their show. Then again, their show wasnt that original or clever...sort of rehashed "cadet" ideas with new direction in music/ arranger.

Sorry, I can't agree ... "When Kings Go Off to War" was one of my favorite Cadets shows of all time. Gorgeous music, beautiful design (especially the guard) and an awesome corps. This is something coming from someone who really doesn't like most of what they do most of the time. It was a show that really engaged the audience and took you somewhere emotionally.

Star, on the other hand was devoid of almost any emotion, obtuse, and unreachable. It was a crashing bore.

Now, when they took Medea and put it on a stage at Lincoln Center the next year, I liked it a whole lot. It wasn't meant for a drum corps field, and Mason obviously realized he wanted to do something other than drum corps ... Yay for him.

They were a great corps, with a lot of talent, and they played and marched well. Cadets did all of that and the audience could relate to. Don't praise Star at their expense that year ... They were both championship-calibre corps.

[ScarletKnight]

Hey - the simple fact is that "higher, faster, louder" is always going to be desired by drum corps fans, period. Star in '93 was technically a good show from some very good performers, but it was kind of like offering sushi at a trucker's diner. Like it or not, the audience ambivalence was reflected in the scoring, and in a close race for scores, that's going to be enough.

Great shows stand for themselves, though; after about 15 years, it really doesn't matter who won that year.

[tommytimp]

I've always felt that Star and Garfield that year were the two most egregiously, show-off-ily difficult shows ever. (And both a bit preposterous, IMO.) And yes, both were executed at an extaordinarily high level. My misgivings about the use of the pit notwithstanding, that Star show is an absolute gas to listen to even now.

[bullethead]

I've always felt that Star and Garfield that year were the two most egregiously, show-off-ily difficult shows ever. (And both a bit preposterous, IMO.) And yes, both were executed at an extaordinarily high level. My misgivings about the use of the pit notwithstanding, that Star show is an absolute gas to listen to even now.

The arrangement of the front ensemble was mostly a result honoring the specific instructions from Bartok's orchestral version, which requires such a symmetrical setup for stereophonic purposes. In person, the same effect was realized by our ensemble. Here is a terrible illustration of what I am referring to:

www.mti.dmu.ac.uk/%7Eahugill/manual/seatingplans/CVDBartokIvessm.jpg

Also, for a completely ridiculous explanation, check this out:

http://solomonsmusic.net/diss7.htm

Blame Bartok, I guess.

Edited August 14, 2008 by bullethead