Lesson Learned From America's Got Talent

[over60]

Who is more talented, Jackie Evancho or Michael Grimm? I think Jackie, even at her tender age, has much more talent than Michael. However, that didn't matter in the judging. The viewing audience, in my opinion, voted considering what type of music they like to hear, rather than on which singer had more talent. The most entertaining singer won, according to the majority of viewers.

DCI's instructors should take note, especially if they truly want to entertain the fans more to increase the national audience. If you look at the sale of music in this country based on genre, the types of music being performed by DCI corps are the least popular: wind ensemble, classical, jazz, show tunes, etc.

Will the DCI instructors change their ways and "pander" to what the public wants? Don't hold your breath. The talent level of both the instructors and membership of the DCI corps is amazing. Why "waste" their talents performing Pop music? No, the instructors want to perform the most sophisticated material their charges can handle. The instructors are "educators". The members are "students". The rules are written to reward the most talented groups no matter what material they perform, which is certainly fair, but not likely to attract more than a minuscule audience, composed mostly of parents, friends, age-outs and old time fans like me, who happen to like sophisticated music.

On a related note, I haven't seen a DCI rule book since 1976 but currently many points are awarded based on show design, not on performance. Does anyone in the audience really understand the General Effect captions? Do away with General Effect. It rewards the instructors, not the performers. Egos are at stake. Expand the other captions and let the talent on the field prevail.

What do you think would happen if the audience at DCI shows would have a vote in the outcome, like on America's Got Talent? I think many instructors would quit. Of course, they don't have to worry about that happening. They make the rules, public be ######.

[HappyDad]

Who is more talented, Jackie Evancho or Michael Grimm? I think Jackie, even at her tender age, has much more talent than Michael. However, that didn't matter in the judging. The viewing audience, in my opinion, voted considering what type of music they like to hear, rather than on which singer had more talent. The most entertaining singer won, according to the majority of viewers.

DCI's instructors should take note, especially if they truly want to entertain the fans more to increase the national audience. If you look at the sale of music in this country based on genre, the types of music being performed by DCI corps are the least popular: wind ensemble, classical, jazz, show tunes, etc.

Will the DCI instructors change their ways and "pander" to what the public wants? Don't hold your breath. The talent level of both the instructors and membership of the DCI corps is amazing. Why "waste" their talents performing Pop music? No, the instructors want to perform the most sophisticated material their charges can handle. The instructors are "educators". The members are "students". The rules are written to reward the most talented groups no matter what material they perform, which is certainly fair, but not likely to attract more than a minuscule audience, composed mostly of parents, friends, age-outs and old time fans like me, who happen to like sophisticated music.

On a related note, I haven't seen a DCI rule book since 1976 but currently many points are awarded based on show design, not on performance. Does anyone in the audience really understand the General Effect captions? Do away with General Effect. It rewards the instructors, not the performers. Egos are at stake. Expand the other captions and let the talent on the field prevail.

What do you think would happen if the audience at DCI shows would have a vote in the outcome, like on America's Got Talent? I think many instructors would quit. Of course, they don't have to worry about that happening. They make the rules, public be ######.

I think it would be interesting to explore more types of music, but wouldn't that push for more instruments....guitars, saxophones, etc. I mean how does a drum corps perform "The Devil Goes Down to Georgia" for instance, without a fiddle? Also, most of the acts in America's Got Talent were solos and small groups. Their acts might get lost on football field compared to the stage. But, the entertainment aspect...yes I understand that. I keep reading on here that people want more entertainment.

Edited September 26, 2010 by HappyDad

[Michael Boo]

If one has a favorite corps any particular year and that corps wins, the judges rewarded both excellence and entertainment. If one has a favorite corps any particular year that that corps doesn't win, the judges probably awarded the championship based on their personal biases. When a corps wins that someone finds entertaining, then the judges were successful at figuring out what and how they should be judging. If another corps wins, then the judges were hamstrung by the tyranny of the rules.

The obvious and foolproof way to avoid all of this is just let me pick the winner and the order of the rest of the corps. That way, it will be done according to God's will and will be irrefutably accurate and fair. Done any other way is just absurd and tempting the eventual fall of Western civilization. And when I'm no longer around because I was called home to help perfect Heaven, the job will fall to the person who best thinks as I do and who best channels my intentions.

I believe it's human nature to believe something is being done right if the results mirror our expectations and desires, and to believe it's wrong if the results are contrary to what we believe. I suspect I'm no different than anyone else...except I'm the only one who undeniably gets it right each and every time.

[Michael Boo]

[skajerk]

I think it would be interesting to explore more types of music, but wouldn't that push for more instruments....guitars, saxophones, etc. I mean how does a drum corps perform "The Devil Goes Down to Georgia" for instance, without a fiddle? Also, most of the acts in America's Got Talent were solos and small groups. Their acts might get lost on football field compared to the stage. But, the entertainment aspect...yes I understand that. I keep reading on here that people want more entertainment.

1980-81 Spirit of Atlanta used it as their drum solo.

[NeutralNovice]

To this day, I am still absolutely dumbfounded at the decision America made for America's Got Talent. Then again, it should be no surprise as this is the same America that voted for Ruben Studdard(sp?), Taylor Hicks, and many others. While Michael Grimm was good, he wasn't spectacular. To be honest, I see his type all the time in small music venues in cities like San Francisco, New York, and Los Angeles. By his type, I mean a cover-singer that sings in a coffee shop as a hobby. In addition, the prize for the show was a gig in Las Vegas. There is no way in hell that he is going to survive in Vegas with the types of shows that they have. The only two performers of the finalists that I would ever see are Prince Poppycock and Defying Gravity... now Prince Poppycock will sell seats in Vegas AND would have the longevity because of the wide range of show designs he could have. But anyway, let's get back to your question...

Do we want America to be the deciding factor for the winner of DCI? For me, heck no. If that was going to be the case, we would literally see the similar shows by all corps year in and year out. Everyone wants to hear the classics of DCI since it is something familiar to us and we will consequently vote subjectively (read: emotions) versus objectively. Not to say that judges never score on a subjective basis but look at how often the "fan favorite" is the winner... it seems fairly rare. By having judges officiate a show is definitely the best option.

And finally, if we were to have the audience at DCI shows vote for the outcome, the results would probably ALWAYS be skewed towards the corps that is considered "local." More people from the midwest are more likely to attend DCI Championships in Indianapolis than those on the East and West coasts due to many factors including distance, time, cost.

Anyway, that's my rant. Good day!

[NeutralNovice]

If one has a favorite corps any particular year and that corps wins, the judges rewarded both excellence and entertainment. If one has a favorite corps any particular year that that corps doesn't win, the judges probably awarded the championship based on their personal biases. When a corps wins that someone finds entertaining, then the judges were successful at figuring out what and how they should be judging. If another corps wins, then the judges were hamstrung by the tyranny of the rules.

The obvious and foolproof way to avoid all of this is just let me pick the winner and the order of the rest of the corps. That way, it will be done according to God's will and will be irrefutably accurate and fair. Done any other way is just absurd and tempting the eventual fall of Western civilization. And when I'm no longer around because I was called home to help perfect Heaven, the job will fall to the person who best thinks as I do and who best channels my intentions.

I believe it's human nature to believe something is being done right if the results mirror our expectations and desires, and to believe it's wrong if the results are contrary to what we believe. I suspect I'm no different than anyone else...except I'm the only one who undeniably gets it right each and every time.

Agreed. It's like the judges of an appellate court being called "activist judges" for deciding on a case that was not in their own opinion. One side applauds them for making the right decision and the other side calls them "activists" to justify their dissent, whether they are truly wrong or truly right.

[garfield]

Agreed. It's like the judges of an appellate court being called "activist judges" for deciding on a case that was not in their own opinion. One side applauds them for making the right decision and the other side calls them "activists" to justify their dissent, whether they are truly wrong or truly right.

So we really do have the equivalent of the "Ninth Circus Court" judging DCI? Go their own way regardless of the precedent set by other courts around the country? But I thought independent thought in judging was celebrated in DCI...

[NeutralNovice]

So we really do have the equivalent of the "Ninth Circus Court" judging DCI? Go their own way regardless of the precedent set by other courts around the country? But I thought independent thought in judging was celebrated in DCI...

Isn't the "Ninth Circus Court" therefore, independently thinking if they ignore precedent?

[Michael Boo]

We're running dangerously close to a political discourse, which can get this thread shut down. There's too much good dialogue that can go on for that to happen.