JamMan Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Dear God I hope the 3rd proposal doesn't pass. Judging entertainment....are you kidding me? For this argument, let's pick the Cavaliers. Let's say they're Top 3 in all captions the whole year. Their tour that year brings them to fairly favorable crowds (mid-west, central, east coast somewhat) that puts them on top of the standings. But, uh-oh, finals is in California. They go from 1st to 5th because they're now on BD and SCV turf, Crown is playing pop tunes and Phantom plays something extremely dark while wearing black. I'm not saying there needs to be justice, but when one caption can change based on fan composition and show location, well, maybe it should be on the judges' sheets. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Bottom line, if everyone thinks that Madison was the most entertaining show in 2010... (I know that isn't the case) I don't want to see every corps try to be like Madison. What's MORE important is that each corps sticks with its identity. This proposal actual goes against what Cesario was saying about letting each corps' identity shine. If we have entertainment as a judged entity that's just another pressure corps will be competing to be like that one corps that gets the most standing O's. Why? Is there only one way to entertain? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Brace Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Dear God I hope the 3rd proposal doesn't pass. Judging entertainment....are you kidding me? For this argument, let's pick the Cavaliers. Let's say they're Top 3 in all captions the whole year. Their tour that year brings them to fairly favorable crowds (mid-west, central, east coast somewhat) that puts them on top of the standings. But, uh-oh, finals is in California. They go from 1st to 5th because they're now on BD and SCV turf, Crown is playing pop tunes and Phantom plays something extremely dark while wearing black. I'm not saying there needs to be justice, but when one caption can change based on fan composition and show location, well, maybe it should be on the judges' sheets. don't worry yourself...#3 is impractical to implement. I believe Mason is using proposals as Stewart and Hopkins have in the past...to push discussion. It is an essential part of the process. Hopkins' proposals were sometimes blatant pushes to change dramatically...like his first woodwinds proposal has. With Mason's recent effort, we have an attempt to identify with what some conceive as a judging bias...where many don't see a bias. I am in this later camp. Judges themselves are fans too. I believe 2008 identified a year where the most entertaining corps did win. Were they the best visually, nope. They played well, marched...ok...but the GE of that show pushed them over the top. When finals week started, I had them 4th. I was as shocked as anyone. Also, the same thing occurred in 1996 for the same corps. I would like to pick apart the 1995 Madison contingent for just a moment. I saw that show every night for an entire year. It was a FAR better GE show before the changes went in before finals. I also think the show became a cliche of itself by the last week. I didn't think the same machismo which rattled through the best "loud" sounding brass section I had ever heard. What the battery and cymbal line accomplished that year was also spectacular. I just think other sections didn't always bring a "newness" to each evening as the incredibly long season wore on and although they were technically very sound...the emotion took a step back...I am mostly talking the last two weeks before finals. At the same time, Cavies caught fire. For them...I think it started with the battery. The changes made just started to explode this show toward all its possibilities. Seeing them in Allentown just caused jaw drops. I thought Madison had a better brass book, sound and cohesion, but Cavies were winning me over in all the other areas. Just for the record, I NEVER connected with the Blue Devils show that year...all the visual elements detracted from a great music book. They marched well, but I was too distracted to really concentrate on their efforts. By the time the week ended they were 3rd. My biggest surprise of the year was The Cadets second place finish. I've never been a fan of that show and the truckloads of props. I found the show cheesy and I liked the brie the Bluecoats were serving that year far more. It went better with my chardonnay. So, all of that recollection to say...Mason's proposal isn't currently necessary and I would imagine most design teams, while respectful, will disagree with the suggested changes. Artists, even when commissioned, seldom attempt to "just satisfy the clients." They must be true to their own vision, otherwise, they are mere craftspeople...pandering to the Snuggie wearing public. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 I don't think I really have to defend this idea, considering that it's played out that way in almost every facet of the entertainment industry. Hollywood churns out buckets of sequels and cookie cutter action flicks, and nearly everything on the Billboard Top 40 sounds identical. ("Gettin crunk in the club" -- check, copy pasta beat in Sony ACID -- check...) Am I saying that fresh and new designs won't happen and won't win. Absolutely not. Let me make that abundantly clear with bold type. What I'm saying is that fewer designers will be willing to take the risk. When you try something risky, you go for the gold or fade into obscurity. You can sit and list risky movies that did well, or innovative songs that topped the charts, but for each example you have of something risky that did well there are countless others that failed miserably and have never seen the light of day. Good grief....such melodrama. I don't think the Blue Devils (for example) would fade into obscurity if they fail to win a 10-point caption for entertainment effect. Perhaps they would concede a tenth of a point to a corps that could surpass them in that caption. Let's not make mountains out of molehills. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drumlaw80 Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Drum corps + anything remotely related to a choir = odd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Todd Tanji Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 It's OK for them to judge based on audience reaction as long as that audience is me. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 > I found the show cheesy and I liked the brie ... It went better with my chardonnay. Therein lies the inherent problem with establishing a competitive point value to crowd entertainment. A German Lager and a French Chardonnay can both be deemed excellent, but the "reaction" to that excellence will be vastly different. Put 20,000 random music fans in a stadium to evaluate the entertainment value of two excellent yet different groups: Dave Matthews Band vs. the Chicago Symphony Orchestra. During the DMB portion, you will see the crowd scream and dance throughout the performance with wildly blasting "more" when the music is over; but during the CSO portion the same crowd will sit silently during the performance then after the final chord they will stand, clap robustly, and politely shout "Encore". So, which was more entertaining to the crowd, DMB or the CSO? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corpsband Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Artists, even when commissioned, seldom attempt to "just satisfy the clients." They must be true to their own vision, otherwise, they are mere craftspeople...pandering to the Snuggie wearing public. Performance artists who don't have a paying audience go broke. Shows that flop on broadway close. Ballets companies that can't sell tickets fold. In any case I think it's a bit of stretch to call marching band / drum corps shows "art". It's freaking marching band. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie1223 Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Why? Is there only one way to entertain? No, and that's exactly my point. How can you judge, and give point values to the infinite ways in which to entertain the crowd?! Impossible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie1223 Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Performance artists who don't have a paying audience go broke. Shows that flop on broadway close. Ballets companies that can't sell tickets fold. In any case I think it's a bit of stretch to call marching band / drum corps shows "art". It's freaking marching band. It's entertaining to me to think that drum corps is like art. And I can't possibly be alone on this. This kind of disagreement on what drum corps "should be" or what it "isn't" is exactly why we (the judges) can not judge entertainment. 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.