Jump to content

Could Drum Corps be heading in the direction of Blast!?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 70
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Exactly.

Isn't that right Crown 2009, or Phantom Regiment 2008? :cry:

let me make it a little more specific.

Blast tried to create a show that wasn't for the average fan and ONLY pleased the critics/judges. This would parallel BD's show last year in many ways as it wasn't quite the excitement that most fans enjoy (though several did), but did well for the judges.

corps can do both; examples are those aforementioned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly.

Isn't that right Crown 2009, or Phantom Regiment 2008? :cry:

One can draw 2 columns from 1999-2009 :

On one column list the DCI Titlist for that year ( over all others)

On the column beside that Corps cite if they were the national fan favorite that year (over all others )

What that research will demonstrate pretty conclusively is that more oftentimes than not, the Titlist is NOT the audience favorite that year. As a matter of fact, it is rare where the Titleist is also the audience favorite. This is because the judges really don't care a wit about the audience reaction to the show. It is how THEY react to the performance, no one else. And the judging captions ( particularly the General Effect capions ) make no provisions for audience receptivity one way or the other with the performance.

Edited by BRASSO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems that most shows are programmed both to be pleasing for the crowd and for the judges. Unless we are show designers or administrators :cry: it is hard for us to know how we are supposed to know the purposes behind the design decisions made.

Note: this is me trying to keep us all in perspective that this is all speculation. It is particularly hard for us to determine what shows are designed to be 'crowd pleasers' because we all have different tastes. Some like hard, fast, loud, dirty shows, and some like slow, methodic, laser-surgeon precise shows.

As far as I'm concerned, my guess is that designers do what they do to try to create judge-based shows that are also entertaining. It is possible to do both.

happy new year, everyone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's simply not true that " Blast "success in the US dwindled pretty quickly". This can be verified in a quantifiable manner too. Ticket sales and attendance figures. It's a verifiable fact that " Blast " grew ticket sales from year to year ( both US and abroad ) as it racked up awards, national acclaim, and word of mouth. It's repeat business at the same location in the US went UP in 2nd, third, 4th visits. It is untrue that it's" US success dwindled pretty quickly" Quite the contrary. And one way we determine continued success of a show in a theatre is the ability of that show to continue to attract sufficient audience members in order to continue to generate profits. " Blast " is still in theatres and on tour because of it's current appeal, and it's ability to still show a profit. No doubt " Blast " no longer packs them in as it used to in the US, but my goodness, this is after a decade of tours in the US.... year... after year... after year...... and with pretty much the same show that it had in it's opening show a decade or so back too.

The fact that " Blast " had " professional performers " as the reason for their successful appeal to audiences is irrelevent as well. The show " Future Shock " by this same design staff had professional performers" in that show too. Very capable performers too from what I'm told. It didn't matter.

Okay, I'll agree with you about Blast's success. But I can't believe that you're really trying to say that playing old DCI favorites was the main reason people paid so much to see an indoor show like Blast. Who knew! Corps coud be making millions every year if they just went around playing old DCI standards indoors because professional performers are irrelevant to being successful for a natinoally touring show like Blast. Heck, if the standard of execution by the musician is so irrelevant, then I could get tour with the band I teach every summer and we could have an amazing fundraiser.

I realize that you will never acknowledge that there just might be other reasons why Blast was successful than that they played some old DCI favorites. That's fine, and you're entitled to your opinion and to telling me how wrong mine is. Nothing else to discuss on this matter.

--------------------------------

Anyway, as much as I loved Blast!, and completely outside any discussion about repertoire, I really hope I'm reading the writing on the wall incorrectly. I don't watch much WGI or BOA, admittedly, and that's because once or twice was enough. Every year, DCI looks and sounds more like it, though. Please no.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems that most shows are programmed both to be pleasing for the crowd and for the judges. Unless we are show designers or administrators :cry: it is hard for us to know how we are supposed to know the purposes behind the design decisions made.

Note: this is me trying to keep us all in perspective that this is all speculation. It is particularly hard for us to determine what shows are designed to be 'crowd pleasers' because we all have different tastes. Some like hard, fast, loud, dirty shows, and some like slow, methodic, laser-surgeon precise shows.

As far as I'm concerned, my guess is that designers do what they do to try to create judge-based shows that are also entertaining. It is possible to do both.

happy new year, everyone

Most are obviously trying to do both. But some people think they can speak for the gerneal dci audience, and that if a show doesn't appeal to them and people don't react the way they would react, then the show was programmed only for the judges.

It gets old, but there's really nothing to be done about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a difference between two wheels and one. That's what I meant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most are obviously trying to do both. But some people think they can speak for the gerneal dci audience, and that if a show doesn't appeal to them and people don't react the way they would react, then the show was programmed only for the judges.

It gets old, but there's really nothing to be done about it.

gotcha. concur.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, I'll agree with you about Blast's success. But I can't believe that you're really trying to say that playing old DCI favorites was the main reason people paid so much to see an indoor show like Blast. Who knew! Corps coud be making millions every year if they just went around playing old DCI standards indoors because professional performers are irrelevant to being successful for a natinoally touring show like Blast. Heck, if the standard of execution by the musician is so irrelevant, then I could get tour with the band I teach every summer and we could have an amazing fundraiser.

I realize that you will never acknowledge that there just might be other reasons why Blast was successful than that they played some old DCI favorites. That's fine, and you're entitled to your opinion and to telling me how wrong mine is. Nothing else to discuss on this matter.

--------------------------------

Anyway, as much as I loved Blast!, and completely outside any discussion about repertoire, I really hope I'm reading the writing on the wall incorrectly. I don't watch much WGI or BOA, admittedly, and that's because once or twice was enough. Every year, DCI looks and sounds more like it, though. Please no.

Well, I really never said (nor implied )" that "Blast" was a success primarily because it played" old DCI favorites ". I did however state that the Star of Indiana staff did not go with their latter days of DCI style when they left DCI and went and designed the show " Blast ". I think it's clear that the designers were going in a MUCH different style with" Blast" than their more esoteric, cerebral, high brow DCI shows they produced in competition at DCI their last 2 years. I don't think that's even debateable frankly. "Blast " had " Medea " and other Star of Indiana musical offerings, but it had mostly non Star signature concepts for the most part. " Blast " designers took a decidedly different approach to grab the audiences emotions than what we saw from Star in their last couple of years in DCI.. In " Blast ", they went with concepts that were known to be entertaining. Some were " old DCI favorites " to be sure , but some were the latest concepts that were shown to have wide appeal with the summer DCI audiences of recent years too. The key it seems was to make Blast appeal to the " judges " in the audience. The paying customers. They were brilliant in designing a show that people woud be entertained by. They knew what would work ( and wouldn't ) with diverse audiences with varied tastes.... and they designed" Blast "for as wide an audience as they could. Which is precisely what highly successful show desgners and successful perfomers in stage and theatre are intuitively tuned into. ALWAYS.

Edited by BRASSO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...