Rochester Review

[Dale Bari]

I personally thought everybody had some really cool ideas in their show and watching Prelims (this is only the second time I have ever done that!) is becoming a favorite drum corps pasttime for me!! I strongly recommend it!

The first time I watched all of Prelims was 2004. I did it again in 2007. This is, hands down, the best entertainment value in all of drum corps. Prelims 2004 is still the best drum corps show I've ever seen.

[ESBarimom]

and this why many don't do reviews. why should the reviewer be called out for feeling as they do? it's their thoughts. you have the option to read it, or not.

I'm a drummer, yet I review all sections of the corps. does make anything i say in my reviews about those sections less valid? no, it's my thoughts. everyone has their thoughts and feelings on what's good, what isn't, and their own preferences to style of show/drill/drum book/you name it. remember, a review is just as subjective as the scoring sheets used.

and yes, in every review, someone gets offended. i just had some pm's the last few days to prove it

Jeff:

I'm truly not offended with the review and this needs to be the last time I say I was only looking for clarification on "moving". Dale knows me pretty well and summed up my question pretty well. I only added detail to the statement to highlight what movement meant to me.

So, I still do await a response from the author. As I said before, I will learn from it and take his interpretation and perspective with me as I watch future shows through his "lens". We all need to be open to the viewpoints of others in life....

Leslie

[Tom D'Bomb]

Jeff:

I'm truly not offended with the review and this needs to be the last time I say I was only looking for clarification on "moving". Dale knows me pretty well and summed up my question pretty well. I only added detail to the statement to highlight what movement meant to me.

So, I still do await a response from the author. As I said before, I will learn from it and take his interpretation and perspective with me as I watch future shows through his "lens". We all need to be open to the viewpoints of others in life....

Leslie

Enough! Dave wrote what we wrote because, as a member of the 1993 Bushwackers, it's in his DNA to think that Empire "don't do nuthin'" that's why we're "clean in April." It's one their corps songs.

I will tell you that Empire had 120 pages of drill and went through 82 different brass players. We'd get an Alumni guy to sign up ("One more time for the Old Man - let's do it!") they'd get to the 40 yard dash portion of the drum solo, or Peter Weber's original build to the company front - the move we like to call "The Ankle Buster," and they'd suddenly remember a handful of family commitments they couldn't get out of.

BushSop89 doesn't need to explain - he's entitled to his opinion. He's got the bling to say anything he wants. I'm not offended - and Jeff, trust me, Leslie isn't offended either (but her ankle will never be the same).

Edited September 5, 2008 by Tom D'Bomb

[Kyle B]

Wow....just....wow.

Man, one person says something that isn't in a positive light and everyone jumps on them demanding an explanation.

[Rory Calhoun]

Enough! Dave wrote what we wrote because, as a member of the 1993 Bushwackers, it's in his DNA to think that Empire "don't do nuthin'" that's why we're "clean in April." It's one their corps songs.

I will tell you that Empire had 120 pages of drill and went through 82 different brass players. We'd get an Alumni guy to sign up ("One more time for the Old Man - let's do it!") they'd get to the 40 yard dash portion of the drum solo, or Peter Weber's original build to the company front - the move we like to call "The Ankle Buster," and they'd suddenly remember a handful of family commitments they couldn't get out of.

BushSop89 doesn't need to explain - he's entitled to his opinion. He's got the bling to say anything he wants. I'm not offended - and Jeff, trust me, Leslie isn't offended either (but her ankle will never be the same).

I don't understand why members and alums of Empire are getting rattled over this. The guy said the 2008 version of the Empire Statesmen didn't move much. He gave you an honest opinion of every corps he saw. You had a very nice season and finished a very respectable 3rd place, and winning high brass. I think the Statesmen moved a heck of a lot more this year than they did in 05 (or was it 06), when the corps played as a back up band to the 2 soloists who stood in the pit, and that piano was pushed all over the field. Great job this year Statesmen. My hat goes off to you guys.

[bumo27]

My hat goes off to you guys.

[truman]

Opinion is an entitlement, but criticism carries the obligation of justification.

Which brings me to my next criticism... the hornline doesn't move. It's as if they have decided to ignore the movement aspect of the activity. They make no attempt at a marching technique. In fact, often times they are walking around the field in a formation. This is a marching activity.

and:

but they were rarely moving and playing. Far too often, the hornline was either walking or they were parked for extended periods of time. The judges should have nailed them on this and they didn't.

Much different then likes and dislikes, (opinion), these harsh comments imply facts that can be verified or disproved. Those being criticized also have rights. Their ankle injuries ENTITLE them.

Watch the videos, I'll get you the page numbers in the prelim and finals threads if you need. I don't see justification in his criticism now, nor did I when I saw ES live 2 times.

The right to an opinion does not afford the right to be innaccurate.

My opinion is that TA's corps song theory has merit

[Jeff Ream]

Well, it's one thing to say, "I don't like" X. But, it's another thing to say something that is empirically incorrect.

Dave said he didn't think that Statesmen moved around enough. That's an opinion, because he didn't supply any evidence that it is true. However, it is something that can be actually known, to be proved or disproved. I think, if we dissected the drills of the Top 5 or so, we'd find that that statement is not true. Judges, as you well know, take those kinds of things into account in their work. If it were true, then ES' scores would've reflected that. But, they did not. He thought that Cabs should've placed 3rd, but the judges disagreed (as did you), so again he's pitting his opinion against the judges'. Someone's right and someone's wrong. Judges are supposed to be the experts, but I leave it for others to decide the outcome of that battle. If one wants to review the corps, then do so, but if one wants to criticize the judging (which is how I interpreted some of his comments), then that's a separate issue - don't make it a corps' problem.

Also, as a reviewer, one should try to be as internally consistent as possible. If one hits 2 corps for the same thing, then one should be consistent in how it affects their overall impression. It appears that Dave did not do this (re: movement of ES vs MBI).

He said he doesn't like props in general and didn't like ES' big signs. I say they were necessary to tell folks that they were honoring past Championship performances of their corps. It's perfectly valid for him to not like it, so no one "called [him] out" on it.

pvt_cairns also did a review of Finals. Some people called him out on not mentioning any other pits besides Reading's. (There were other criticisms, but that's the main one I recall, other than jabs at his lack of proficiency at spelling, IIRC.) Who jumped to his defense?

Leslie asked some legit questions. I know Leslie isn't trying to be controversial - she genuinely wants to know how Dave came to his conclusion and what other, deeper thoughts could he provide. As for Canuck, if he was really trying to slam Dave's review, he could've done so a lot more forcefully. Really, these criticisms of this review are pretty tepid, as fas as such reactions usually go. (ie, see critique's of pvt_cairns' review in a nearby thread.) Dave needs very little defense. I myself said it was a pretty good review (other than a couple of points).

I try to be as balanced as possible in my reviews. I also have two kids I'm trying to watch (so they don't get into trouble and so they don't disturb the other fans around us) so I probably don't get into the inner workings of the shows as much as I'd like. Maybe if I did, I might say something more "offensive", but so far I've never had any PM "hate mail" on my reviews. (And, I'd like to add that I did reviews before I had kids, too.)

Dale,

first off, i've yet to see a review EVER that agrees 100% with the judges. I also commented on the signs and how they need more as they forgot 2 championships.I also didnt mention everyone's pit. so in some ways we agree ( Dave and I)....but to be honest, if he felt that way, so be it. he shouldnt have to be drawn and quartered for saying what he thinks and feels.

To be honest, after the first read, I also felt they stood around too much. luckily in the 2nd viewing, I noticed it was more than I thought. the problem with Empire, and I've said this before, is they make it seem too easy and at times, it doesnt look as hard as it is. Which is why, sometimes I think they get performer over book numbers.

[basicblue]

"Bush: I liked the show, definitely the most original thing on the field. I liked the sound but I have some criticisms here as well. First off, the hornline was too small for this show. I'm sure they anticipated having more than 30+ horns when they picked the show. With that said, this music needed a lot more oomph. They lacked the overall volume that every other open class corps had. And the show was a bit redundant. After their quasi-ballad sort of number, they went back into a groove in the pit that we heard several times already. Which brings me to my next point, I couldn't hear the front ensemble unless the rest of the corps wasn't playing. On Saturday I was in the mezzanine/vip section and at finals I was down on the field. And for both performances, I couldn't hear the front ensemble well enough. I thought the drumline was very good, especially the snares. I thought the hornline had a very good sound, and they were one of the few corps that moved and played difficult parts, and they did it very well. (several corps have lost sight of the fact that this is a marching activity) I thought the guard was excellent. Through most of finals I thought they were a lock for high colorguard until I saw Reading. I think their placement hurt them. If they were on later in the evening (perhaps in the top three) I think they could have taken high guard.

From what I've heard, Bush had a difficult season. I think they ended pretty strong... as they usually do. I agreed with their placement. "

Couldn't help but put my two cents in on this: I enjoyed the show but yes , they were placed where they should have been. I was dissappointed that the front ensemble didn't step it up for finals. IMO only two of the members looked like they were even enjoying the performance, a tall young man and a very blonde young lady, they looked like they loved the show and they performed it. Again IMO the others looked like they were a bit nervous or scared. And the sound was barely audible. The snares were on ... plates looked inexperianced and a bit confused. But great show Bush you always put out something to look forward to.

Congrates to all!!!!

Edited September 5, 2008 by basicblue

[Dale Bari]

Dale,

first off, i've yet to see a review EVER that agrees 100% with the judges. I also commented on the signs and how they need more as they forgot 2 championships.I also didnt mention everyone's pit. so in some ways we agree ( Dave and I)....but to be honest, if he felt that way, so be it. he shouldnt have to be drawn and quartered for saying what he thinks and feels.

To be honest, after the first read, I also felt they stood around too much. luckily in the 2nd viewing, I noticed it was more than I thought. the problem with Empire, and I've said this before, is they make it seem too easy and at times, it doesnt look as hard as it is. Which is why, sometimes I think they get performer over book numbers.

But that's the problem: he's NOT been "drawn and quartered" over his comment. Now, it's the "reaction to the reaction" that's getting blown out of proportion. You and Kyle seem to be thinking and saying that "Geez, this backlash is SO over the top" and it's not been. By continuing to hit on this meme, it's your reactions that are perpetuating the idea that Dave's review was outrageous - it was not. Leslie's reaction is completely understandable. His subjective opinion doesn't jibe with her reality, so she got that "Huh?!" feeling and wanted some clarification. Canuck also got a "huh?" reaction because his take is so at odds with Dave's. (Frankly, I did too, but that doesn't bother me so much.)

When I do reviews, I very rarely if ever feel the need to say "I had X corps in X place". Fans who didn't attend the show I reviewed can read the recaps or the scores and come to their own conclusions about what happened in the competition. My job as a reviewer is to relay info they can't get from a recap. Maybe there is opportunity for some sort of judging travesty to occur, but short of it happening in Finals, it just doesn't matter, so why belabor the point? Maybe one or two judges get something wrong, but a corps getting royally screwed happens very infrequently. In those instances, a review including that kind of info/opinion is completely justified. (The DCW article about DCA Prelims in 1987 written by Ed Cagney about MBI finishing 11th comes to my mind.)

The people who want to argue with the judging can do so, but it's all in the wording, too. A nimble writer can make a point without seeming confrontational. Not that I think Dave necessarily did that in this case. It's just that his comments in context appear to be saying, "ES doesn't move much, therefore they should be fifth". He also seems to be arguing that, because of his "revelation", ES' High Brass trophy win isn't legit. That goes beyond mere disagreeing with the judges. That starts calling the generally accepted rules of competition into question, and it starts smacking of a little disrespect. (See below for more on that thought.)

Hey, the judges probably don't agree amongst themselves either, so it's not a matter of agreeing or disagreeing. It's about making statements that can be verified, empirically true or untrue. Saying, "Cabs got screwed this year. That one judge dumped them," falls into the empirically untrue category. As I mentioned earlier, with proper dissection of the drills of the Top 5 or so, we can actually find out if ES moved "enough" compared to the other corps. I don't think anyone actually wants to do that.

Opinions are not Zeus' aegis; they are not bulletproof, invisible shields meant to ward off any and all criticism. If one has the intent to make a cutting remark about something that can be verified, one should have some kind of proof to back it up. Notice that no one connected to ES has taken Dave on about his comments regarding the individual members' style, or lack thereof. (ES got 6th in the Field Vis caption, so he may have been on to something.) The retorts have only focused on his comment about the drill, because it has the virtue of being provably untrue.

As in your 2006 review of Lewisburg, you replay the whole "ES making it look TOO easy" meme, with which I still take umbrage - based upon the principle that that statement makes no sense ("So, we should suck a little more, so that it looks its 'proper' difficulty?" or "So, if we can make it look that easy, we should have beaten Bucs, no?"), and not because it was directed at my corps.

I think on DCP, we on the DCA side do a rather remarkable job of not disrespecting each other, since we are at once both fans and performers. Making comments about style ("I don't like props.") falls into pure opinion, hence completely non-verifiable. Making comments about substance gets a little trickier, because they require some objectivity, like saying, "The sopranos had a bad night; they missed attacks and releases." That kind of statement still is respectful because it is about a transient thing - one particular night's performance. But, telling members of a corps, "you don't move enough," (which is not only a constant week to week, but also is completely out of their control) when they have the "scars" that prove otherwise, starts sounding disrespectful. I know that's not what Dave meant, but this comment also has that tinge to it.

PS: Check my prior post on this matter a little more closely; the review I showed getting knocked for not mentioning pits (except one) was pvt_cairns, not Dave's, so your agreement is misplaced.

Edited September 5, 2008 by Dale Bari