Bob J Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 Not meant to insult anyone, so please don't take my question the wrong way! First a little background. I aged out the year before Star fielded their first corps, and spent the next 20-some-odd years away from the activity, so I missed out on the whole Star of Indiana thing. As I have caught up and been listening to the recordings, I have been wondering why did the 1991 show win? I know I need to give it another dozen or so listens, but to my ears it doesn't come close to '93, '90 or even '92, so what gives? Oh, and to save some of you the trouble, I do realize it had the highest score! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Bennett3rd Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 you need to see that show. Then watch all the other shows that night...you'll have your answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GMichael1230 Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 Not meant to insult anyone, so please don't take my question the wrong way!First a little background. I aged out the year before Star fielded their first corps, and spent the next 20-some-odd years away from the activity, so I missed out on the whole Star of Indiana thing. As I have caught up and been listening to the recordings, I have been wondering why did the 1991 show win? I know I need to give it another dozen or so listens, but to my ears it doesn't come close to '93, '90 or even '92, so what gives? Oh, and to save some of you the trouble, I do realize it had the highest score! It won because it deserved to. The total show was really on another level design - wise in regards to integration and presentation. G 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mingusmonk Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 you need to see that show. Then watch all the other shows that night...you'll have your answer. Agreed. Viewing is a requirement of Star 91. It is one of the first shows I can remember (to me) where listening alone wasn't near as satisfying as seeing it along with the music. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradrick Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 (edited) I may be WAY oversimplifying my answer but - it was a combination of things. And I believe the biggest factors were: They won because the COMPLETELY owned their show in a way no other corps could match that year. (The hornline - for that space in time - was jaw dropping. Just ridiculous.) They won because Zingali did what he did best in a show that so brilliantly matched the music that I believe his particular style of drill writing peaked with that show. By "his particular style", I mean the snaking morphing style where forms morphed from set to set while staying basically connected - as opposed to what drill evolved into after that. (Which was shows with practically no discernable transitions between sets. And no relationships from one form to the next. Form. Disolve. Form. Disolve. Like looking into one of those Viewmasters. Anyone remember those? Where every picture was completely new with each click.) Zingali made the drill itself come alive. Like watching an organism moving across the field. A giant amoeba swimming around and BAM stopping with the perfect set at ALL the right spots in the music.Certainly Marc Sylvester and Myron Rosander (among others) had their own shining moments in the years to come. (The 93 Cadets and 99 SCV shows come to mind. ) But the 91 show remains in my own mind as the peak of Zingali-esque writing that was never surpassed. If you can get your hands on the Star of Indiana Anthology DVD, there is - MIRACULOUSLY - a High Camera angle of the 91 show on there. It is a gift from the Gods that they put that on there. And anyone who watches that angle should have no problem understanding why Star won that year. And would hopefully also recognize Pure Genius when they see it. Edited February 5, 2010 by bradrick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 Not meant to insult anyone, so please don't take my question the wrong way!First a little background. I aged out the year before Star fielded their first corps, and spent the next 20-some-odd years away from the activity, so I missed out on the whole Star of Indiana thing. As I have caught up and been listening to the recordings, I have been wondering why did the 1991 show win? I know I need to give it another dozen or so listens, but to my ears it doesn't come close to '93, '90 or even '92, so what gives? Oh, and to save some of you the trouble, I do realize it had the highest score! You sure missed a lot in that 20 years! I couldn't remember why I loved Star's '91 show so much so I took your post as an opportunity to pull out my Legacy DVD and watch it. My opinion is that you can't possibly judge the entirety of that show from just listening to the CDs. You really need to see the visual aspect of the show to understand how cutting edge it really was. In the first 8 bars of the opener the drill screamed "Zingali" and was "Z-Pull" spectacular throughout the whole show. The guard splashes were amazing, the flag color choices were the richest, and biggest, I remember, and the cross disappearing across the 50 in the closer was classic scatter drill. Interesting note: Reading Boo's liner notes he said "For the first time in Drum Corps International Finals history the Champion, Star of Indiana, did not win a single caption outright (my bold), but instead tied in three captions." I still don't understand how that's possible scoring-wise, but well describes how you can't judge that show by any one caption, especially just listening to the music. You really have to see the whole package to answer your own question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 I'd put my enjoyment of the Star 91 music selections slightly below 90 (my favorite) and 93. But it was still pretty darn difficult and I still would put it in my top 15 brass books. Captions in 91 were all over the place for Star and the Cavies. It was just one of those weird wins. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeN Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 Just from a fan perspective, I felt that the Cavs and Star were pretty much flip-a-coin. I didn't really see anything that one did significantly better than the other. (I liked both; I'm not saying that, but I didn't really see any separation between them.) Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwscv87 Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 I did not get to see it live. Based upon recordings I have always thought the visual design and performance was pretty stunning. I was partial to Phantom in 1991, but with an 18.1 in percussion they had no chance. In looking at the recaps it was a tossup between the Cavies and Star with the exception of brass. Star tied for first in brass with BD, Cavies took fourth 8 tenths back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommytimp Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 Phantom had my favorite total show by far that year, but Star did indeed have a very "Civus Romanus," the-world-starts-and-ends-with-us air to them on the field. They really did own the field, much as the best BD corps often have throughout history. Hate what they did with the pit, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.