The difference between a clean show and an entertaining show

[A humble flag lover]

Reading this reminded me of my 10th grade show... Honestly that show visually wasn't very clean (except the ballad visually CLEAN! but not the rest) And the area I come from in Texas is very harsh competing wise. I went to Klein Forest, and some people have us at a high level of performance year round... but recently at my high school marching has been a major problem. Thus my 9th grade year was awful marching wise... (we got last place at every show) then when the next year came around we worked our BUTTS off!! It was a difficult show to march and when we went to UIL Area we made finals. It was the first time in along time that Klein Forest made finals at Area. We may not have been clean visually but playing wise we were ranked in the top 5. That being said I prefer entertaining shows more than anything else... because even when you are marching (or watching) you want to feel like you just seen the most amazing thing in the world! (plus you want your moneys worth.) Judging wise I think they should take for granted the fan favorite but I hate to say it... I don't think judges should judge groups by "fan favorites". Yeah the show I marched in was popular at the shows but we placed exactly where we were suppose to be at. Thus is always why we have the Countdown and vote in our favorite shows... oh wait... DCI took that away from us last year... oh well but i'm sure you get my point...

Hey why did they take that away from us?

[A humble flag lover]

I guess one solution to this problem would be to institute penalties for dropped equipment. This way it can be huge factor in scoring. I am so sick of seeing so many dropped pieces of equipment. Its like, ok its hard to throw a saber 30 feet in the air. If you don't catch it,no big deal currently you are not penalized so I guess everyone can try 50ft throws, drop them all and be rewarded because it was difficult to execute and they tried. If every dropped piece of equipment was given a 1/10 tic, you would see a difference in scoring, cleaner shows. But i guess thee are some on here who would say the dropped equipmnet is entertaining.

Woah, you act as if they don't work there butts off to catch 7's and 8's (tosses). Even if there isn't a penality regarding dropped equipment, no one likes or revels in dropping equipment. The performers take this extremely personally, but they have to keep going with the show. Secondly, they clean and try to perfect their respective work for the sake of the show and their performance. When we dont catch our tosses it's the equivalent of a percussionist dropping their stick/mallet, or a horn player. It's definitely NOT intentional.

Unless it's written in the show

[saxfreq1128]

....and this is why the General Effect sheets need to be shredded and re-written. The GE sheets should almost be written from a fans POV.....how does this music come across to the audience? How does this visual component reach mom and dad?

No thank you.

[garfield]

To each his own for sure, but when you use the term "offended" does that mean that if you like country music and you hear "hip hop" playing that you are offended by it? I just feel that this is a lot of hoo hah about nothing. Some people like jazz, others like classical or even John Philips Sousa. Why can't corps explore different musical genres without being labeled as destroying drum corps. It's just not so.

To me it's just another form of control...."like what I like or else!"

Wait a second, Plan. That I don't like or appreciate a particular kind of music is not the issue. I'm not crazy about Madonna but Crown's encore score gets my foot tapping.

I think this is about connection with the audience. We have recent memory ('08) of a crowd reaction to the extreme, and I'm sure there are lots of corps who earned golf claps that could be used as the measurement bounds.

Imagine a judge on the track who, instead of looking at the field, is looking at the crowd. He stays in the same place and, with an eye of experience or training, is charged with "measuring" the crowd reaction to what's happening on the field. We've all sat in the stands and could hear a pin drop at the beginning of a ballad, all heads intent on the effect on the field. A "crowd judge" would experience the same thing. Or he might hear a ballad on the field and see the fans' heads turning or looking down, or people popping up to go get a hot dog.

I think a "fan judge", when looking at the audience as a whole, could easily interpret what's going on in the stands with what's going on out on the field. Especially if the designers had the chance to explain the emotion intended from each section, piece, or the whole show.

If fans understood that they were being "judged" they might or might not act differently. But the vagaries could be worked out.

That way, if only a third of the people in the stands like Madonna (or whatever hip-hop piece is being played) and react enthusiastically, a judge would be fair to say that the corps did not move the audience that night with their musical selection or the show that's written around it. (Yes, I KNOW you see what I did there! )

I think something like this could work, but it doesn't command a certain type of music be played by any means.

[saxfreq1128]

Wait a second, Plan. That I don't like or appreciate a particular kind of music is not the issue. I'm not crazy about Madonna but Crown's encore score gets my foot tapping.

I think this is about connection with the audience. We have recent memory ('08) of a crowd reaction to the extreme, and I'm sure there are lots of corps who earned golf claps that could be used as the measurement bounds.

Imagine a judge on the track who, instead of looking at the field, is looking at the crowd. He stays in the same place and, with an eye of experience or training, is charged with "measuring" the crowd reaction to what's happening on the field. We've all sat in the stands and could hear a pin drop at the beginning of a ballad, all heads intent on the effect on the field. A "crowd judge" would experience the same thing. Or he might hear a ballad on the field and see the fans' heads turning or looking down, or people popping up to go get a hot dog.

I think a "fan judge", when looking at the audience as a whole, could easily interpret what's going on in the stands with what's going on out on the field. Especially if the designers had the chance to explain the emotion intended from each section, piece, or the whole show.

If fans understood that they were being "judged" they might or might not act differently. But the vagaries could be worked out.

That way, if only a third of the people in the stands like Madonna (or whatever hip-hop piece is being played) and react enthusiastically, a judge would be fair to say that the corps did not move the audience that night with their musical selection or the show that's written around it. (Yes, I KNOW you see what I did there! )

I think something like this could work, but it doesn't command a certain type of music be played by any means.

If this were a college band competition, whose investment is purely in the entertainment factor of each show, I would see your point.

But does this really serve an organization that has the potential / has already gone far to make the marching arts, not only an important entertainment medium, but also an important artistic/performance medium? You may think so, but I would have to respectfully disagree.

Edited July 20, 2010 by saxfreq1128

[BozzlyB]

Woah, you act as if they don't work there butts off to catch 7's and 8's (tosses). Even if there isn't a penality regarding dropped equipment, no one likes or revels in dropping equipment. The performers take this extremely personally, but they have to keep going with the show. Secondly, they clean and try to perfect their respective work for the sake of the show and their performance. When we dont catch our tosses it's the equivalent of a percussionist dropping their stick/mallet, or a horn player. It's definitely NOT intentional.

Unless it's written in the show

There may not be a specific penalty related to drops in the color guard caption, but I gotta believe it has an impact on the Visual GE score SOMEwhere.

[corpsband]

But does this really serve an organization that has the potential / has already gone far to make the marching arts, not only an important entertainment medium, but also an important artistic/performance medium? You may think so, but I would have to respectfully disagree.

I have to ask this even though I know the answer...are you serious? Who thinks that drum corps is "an important artistic/performance medium?" I am as passionate about the activity as the next guy but "important" ? Seriously?

Edited July 20, 2010 by corpsband

[perc2100]

I guess what my question is, is there a difference between these two types of shows? On the one hand the judges will always favor a show that is very well executed and very clean. On the other hand are the shows that are just completely enjoyable to watch, very difficult to get 100% clean due to the difficult nature of them, and tough to compete with. I believe that there are times where a show can be both very clean and very fun to watch, but it seems that in marching music (not just drum corps) that the staff has to sit down and ask, Do we want to make a show that we will be able to get perfect by the end of the season, or do we want to make a show that will push the limits of the activity? Should corps that focus just on pumping out super squeaky clean shows be rewarded with a title when they are not pushing the limits of the activity? Should a show that is very easy, very clean, and somewhat exciting win? Im not talking about BD here, just any shows in general.

I have marched in the Davis High Marching Band here in Utah for 3 years, and every year we would take the "very difficult to get clean, but very exciting" approach to the activity. We would never win against our competitors because even though our show was exciting, and often an audience favorite, it just was simply not as clean or easy as the bands that took first. Should there there be (or perhaps make them more critical in the judging process) spots on judging sheets in which crowd appeal and overall difficulty of the show factor in?

What do you guys think?

Having not read most of the replies yet, I apologize if this is redundant.

"Entertaining" is not on any marching activity judge's sheets that I'm aware of. A corps show can be very clean, well executed, and chock full of effect (as dictated by the sheets: "effect" does not mean "entertaining"), max out points & fulfill the rubric on the sheets, but not be entertaining to everyone. Obviously, no show is entertaining to everybody. And yes, shows that focus on designing programs that max out the effect, execution, and design captions should be rewarded with points over shows that are entertaining but dirty.

[corpsband]

Having not read most of the replies yet, I apologize if this is redundant.

"Entertaining" is not on any marching activity judge's sheets that I'm aware of. A corps show can be very clean, well executed, and chock full of effect (as dictated by the sheets: "effect" does not mean "entertaining"), max out points & fulfill the rubric on the sheets, but not be entertaining to everyone. Obviously, no show is entertaining to everybody. And yes, shows that focus on designing programs that max out the effect, execution, and design captions should be rewarded with points over shows that are entertaining but dirty.

Please see the GE Music sheet.

On the back :

Contains a pleasing combination of AESTHETIC, INTELLECTUAL, EMOTIONAL considerations resulting in entertainment

[N.E. Brigand]

But does this really serve an organization that has the potential / has already gone far to make the marching arts, not only an important entertainment medium, but also an important artistic/performance medium?

Well, if crowd appeal is just one more category under consideration, and not the entire standard by which a corps is judged, it would serve to militate against any tendencies by designers and arrangers to disregard the audience. An artform which strives to alienate its public is doomed. If the corps, collectively or individually, think that there is an alternate public available, or that the audience merely needs to be educated to appreciate what they're doing, should it not be their responsibility to step up their marketing and educational outreach to prove that?