SCV 2009 vs Cadets 1987

[DCIpwnstesn00bs]

I'm glad this topic has finally surfaced. '87 Cadets hands down...much more excitement

and extremely more difficult music and drill!

I have never been more disappointed with the level of musical score and drill as in SCV '09!...

and this comes from a long, LONG standing SCV fan from as far back as 1974! I cannot believe

the fodder that their staff must have been feeding the judges all year concerning their show.

How do you enter "box 5" when your drill design has no demand, constant slow movement, and very

few times where size of step changes? All of this music has been bastardized, and repeated themes

over and over in individual to full group exposure. I know this music well! Let's count minutes where the horn line plays tutti! Did we reach a tempo faster than 160?

Certainly not often. And hey, my middle school band can play quarter and eighth note songs, and

has played Appalachian Spring with much success! Adifferent level, yes...but hey!

But, "oh, weren't those drill sets pretty and flowing and smooth melodies gorgeous?" Well, yes! Did

they entertain us with valued GE? NO! Box 5, NO! And the guard work...oh I mean all that dancing? I have a real problem with drum corps trying to dance well on a football field if not trained in dance. My sister was a long time professional dancer...SCV's guard was a futile attempt at dance...most of which could never be seen with the wide dresses worn throughout...helping to hide body angles and moves.

I appreciate the '87 Cadets for all of the opposite reasons above...faster movement, more dificult drill, and higher GE factor. As far as guard, they were not portraying dance, as did SCV, but did

a marvelous job with entertaining the crown with much more equipment work. I understand what SCV was trying to do, and their angle...most of the audience and I disagree. We're entitled to an opinion.

I am dissapointed in the DCI Judging community in their scoring placement of such a simplistic package into such a high ranking position. I have no idea how they placed 5th. I do know if you placed a decibal meter into the audience at each corps' ending, at least one to three corps would have had a much larger crowd reaction. Have you not heard it? Bluecoats and Boston both received more applause and more reaction throughout their shows. Judges, do you understand this?

I wish to take nothing away from SCV's corps members for doing a good job musically and moving to what their staff had provided them...and mind you, due to the slow tempo and sustained voicings, SCV probably had the best resonance of anyone in that horrid stadium. And hey, if drum corps is going to have to stay at Indy for another 8 years, everyone should consider dumbing down their music and drill to accomodate this stadium.

I wonder if another corps would have done the same show with different uniforms would have even made finals. Hmmmmm.

You know how Olympic atheletes receive weighted scores for routine difficulty and execution? Why aren't those same types of music and drill considered in the same way for drum corps (especially "box 5"!)?

Disclaimer: I love drum corps, performed it, watched it, and sibling followed into it. I've watched it grow and change over the years for better and worse and back again. I know how hard all of these kids have worked throughout their season and appreciate it. I wish all the staff and judges the best in their creations and evaluations...please work on what is "BOX 5!

take a deep breath, feel better? haha

but i do agree with for the most part, i would have put bluecoats over scv myself, but hey, i wasnt there finals night so i cant really make that call till i get my dvds

[The Other Mike]

I'm always amazed at fans who don't ( or can't ) appreciate the sound of a brass line that is able to sustain notes on the move and enjoy the harmonys and textures vs ( as I head a drummer put it ) a line that plays a lot more black notes................

Cover those black notes with the lovely rimshots and there goes exposure.

For it's time, I loved Cadets but once I listened to the cd's, the sound was flat out trash. When I'm able to hear SCV 09 on a cd I will be able to make an informed comment.

As far as hearing it live, SCV IMHO was a rare taste of refinement.

But by all means, if it's fast licks and formica that everyone seems to enjoy, anyone of the top six had a much "better" show.

I just don't understand whats so musical about drums tuned out of the range of having tone quality just so they can play faster..................tennis shoes in a dryer have as much tonal center as any DCI line today.

But, to each their own

[RockEuph]

It's apples and oranges really. Yes it's almost the exact same source material. ALMOST. Garfield based their 87 program on the more popular and well known Orchestral Suite while SCV 09 was based on the original ballet score written for a 13 piece chamber orchestra. Both presented programs that were close to the original materials, though The Cadets took a few more liberties. Both had beautifully flowing visual design albeit with different approaches as the Cadets were flying around with that legendary George Zingali drill while Vanguard took a more elegant, subdued approach and i find that both were performed exceptionally well. Given the very difficult choice of picking just one, I give the nod to the 2009 Santa Clara Vanguard. I found that the visual was much more befitting the style of Aaron Copland and Martha Graham, was executed well. From a musical standpoint, while not having the "beef" of the legendary Garfield Cadets, was much more in the style of the original and, being a brass person, I feel that the hornline played much more musically than Garfield. However, I really don't see the need to compare and think that both stand alone as great shows in drum corps history.

Edited August 27, 2009 by RockEuph

[DCIpwnstesn00bs]

It's apples and oranges really. Yes it's almost the exact same source material. ALMOST. Garfield based their 87 program on the more popular and well known Orchestral Suite while SCV 09 was based on the original ballet score written for a 13 piece chamber orchestra. Both presented programs that were close to the original materials, though The Cadets took a few more liberties. Both had beautifully flowing visual design albeit with different approaches as the Cadets were flying around with that legendary George Zingali drill while Vanguard took a more elegant, subdued approach and i find that both were performed exceptionally well. Given the very difficult choice of picking just one, I give the nod to the 2009 Santa Clara Vanguard. I found that the visual was much more befitting the style of Aaron Copland and Martha Graham, was executed well. From a musical standpoint, while not having the "beef" of the legendary Garfield Cadets, was much more in the style of the original and, being a brass person, I feel that the hornline played much more musically than Garfield. However, I really don't see the need to compare and think that both stand alone as great shows in drum corps history.

its all in good fun, they r both great shows, just curious about what everything thinks

[RockEuph]

its all in good fun, they r both great shows, just curious about what everything thinks

i can see that, i had fun throwing in my two cents. i just put that last part in to cover my ###

[byline]

I have a hard time voting on this one. There are so many great aspects of both shows that I enjoyed. Santa Clara's guard was better than Garfield's, and I enjoyed how sublime Santa Clara's treatment was, a gradual build right to the end (which, as Rock points out, is true to the source material, the original ballet, as opposed to the orchestral suite on which Garfield patterned its show). But Garfield's show had all the impacts and highlights in all the right places, it had the runs played on horns, not exclusively on keyboards, and in terms of drill it certainly was brilliantly innovative for its time. So, for me, it's a tough choice.

Edited August 27, 2009 by byline

[byline]

Guard - SCV 09 (however it is impossible to compare two guard ensembles separated by 22 years)

True, but you could compare Garfield's guard to their peers at the time, and I think if you did that, you'd find them lacking. Not in the writing . . . though, for example, it was obvious that they had to have their rifle work watered down to pretty much strap work only, as I don't think there's any point where they actually release the rifles. (I seem to recall reading that they had a harder rifle book earlier in the season, but many drops later, they simplified the work to clean it up.) They were a lovely guard with lots of interpretive body work, and one of the most beautiful guard uniforms ever. But they just weren't a top-tier guard. Timing and technique were fuzzy, whereas Santa Clara's '87 guard was doing harder stuff, and doing it cleaner. Looking at the entire top 12 that year, I would put Garfield's guard in sixth place, after Madison and ahead of Star.

It would've been interesting to see what the outcome would've been if there had been a guard caption score that year.

[DCIpwnstesn00bs]

i like how the polls have gone from garfield by a mile to almost 50 50

[supersop]

i like how the polls have gone from garfield by a mile to almost 50 50

I could only guess that is from pollsters who weren't born when Garfield put out their 87 show. Probably haven't even seen a video of the show and if they had, it was only for one viewing. One must really take the time to disect each show with multiple viewings before you can say flat out one is better than the other (IN THEIR OPINION). Polls that stretch 22 years of performances start with educated votes and end as a popularity contest.

[jwscv87]

I won't pick a winner other than to say I love both shows.

SCV is loads better musically IMO while Garfield is just as superior visually. Very different shows, both great.