Flying Under The Radar

[arrangerx]

A brief continuation and commentary, for what it's worth.

First, regarding Teal Sound last year: The corps on the field played well. Maybe even well enough to be 18th. (Maybe not.) The electronics and "non-traditional" instruments sat squarely on TOP of the ensemble sound, and were a distraction. Good performance but poor balance/blend, and questionable choices on tone distortion, with a sound system that was "okay" will always result in "that's kinda cool, but I'm not stepping out of my comfort zone with scoring as a judge".

It has to be done professionally.

While electronics may be relatively new to drum corps, they are not new to anyone's ears. We know when it sounds good, and when it does not. We've been listening to a blend of acoustic and electronic music literally since the day we were born.

A friend of mine reminded me of something Don Angelica once said: "Just because we borrow from all the other performing arts doesn't mean we do any of them particularly well."

To that end, Teal Sound is working on a more professional-sounding blend of electronic, acoustic and non-traditional instrumentation. The last couple of years can be considered an experiment, with lesson learned, and new directions implied.

It's not that judges don't have "guts". . . I have a great many friends in the judging community, and that is not something a single individual lacks, when you have to make decisions every single night of the summer. The corps have to be willing to hear and see things, and then figure out why a particular judge may have said something. It's detective work, which requires an honest, open self-evaluation sans ego.

Secondly, regarding the judging of individual performance on non-traditional instruments in drum corps: It is my understanding that at this time, the same judge who evaluates the pit (field percussion) is responsible for evaluating individual achievement from non-traditional instruments.

A synth is not so different from any other keyboard instrument, except in this way. There cannot be an evaluation of technique; only the criteria "does it sound good". For some that may be too vague. But consider this. Any technique is valid. What we do in drum corps is try to align techniques of individuals when they are playing in a section of other like-instruments (e.g. snare line, baritone line, etc.) But how many synths do you compare for matched technical achievement?

For some, this will not be an adequate answer. I get it.

So. . .

Here's the very real, plain and simple truth.

The ability to judge the latest technological and instrumental changes is not fully realized yet. Training and discussions happen.

A parallel from worlds we've already been to in our past: in 1980, Santa Clara Vanguard came out with ground-breaking drill, which didn't fit the vocabulary of the judging sheets at the time. They were writing and performing outside the box. It took a few years for the system to catch up, which began with the introduction of achievement build-up captions in some areas (not all) in 1984.

Another parallel: Dance. Lots of corps are credited with introducing elements of dance as far back as the 50's from what I can tell. In the DCI era, Santa Clara doing the Bottle Dance, the Bridgemen giving us a little "street" dance, Blue Devils with their sleek body work and feather dances from 1981 - 1984, Madison Scouts giving us the masculine interpretation of Gene Kelly and Broadway type foot-work while spinning rifles, and finally the highlight of the 80's Dance movement, Spirit of Atlanta, who had begun to work on dance probably as early as 1980 during "Sweet Georgia Brown", but defined Dance as a legitimate form of expression in drum corps. From there it steam-rolled. . . Phantom Regiment's work with ballet in the late 80's, solo dancers (again with ballet) in Garfield Cadet's 1987 "Appalachian Spring Suite", Dutch Boy's Vegas Dancers. . . even the goofy, fun version of African Break Dancing by the Velvet Knights in 1988 and the 1995 Madison Scouts in "Malaga" with the bull-fighter dance.

Should I mention how similar the Phantom Regiment's halt position is to Ballet's 4th position?

(Pardon the longest run-on sentence with no conclusion in recent memory.)

The point I will make with this is that the vocabulary and training of the judging system, the judges themselves were not ready to properly evaluate what they were being presented with. We tried. Didn't work. So, redesign the sheets, train the judges in vocabulary, teach them to recognize achievement. It takes time.

Same with non-traditional instruments today.

An important thing to know, is that a guitar player gets no more or less credit than any other individual from a field music standpoint. And for those corps that choose to highlight guitars, etc., it is no different that evaluating a show that is built around a great soloist. Pacing, exposure, expression, variety, etc., are all factors.

It is not enough to simply show up and plug something in.

Anyway, I'm sure this has wandered long enough. Sufficed to say that drum corps evaluation evolves, just as the drum corps performances do. They will always be a step behind, because it takes time to learn something new.

All for now -- gotta get back to actually working.

best,

Chuck Naffier

Since I was on Teal's brass staff in 2009 and 2011 (not teaching there anymore), I'd be happy to answer your questions.

A. It's mostly Ensemble Music. It's also been judged on Music Effect, and percussion performance to a lesser degree.

B. Style, balance, technique (see below), quality of sound, the same things brass and percussion players are judged on.

C. Here's where the wicket gets sticky. No DCI judge, in my two years with the corps, even went into the guts of rock guitar, bass, and keyboard playing. No guitar/piano-centric pedagogy comments were made on any tape I heard (and I heard most if not all Music Ensemble and GE Music tapes). All comments were either generalizations (style, technique with regards to the ensemble) balance, volume, etc. I can live with that, provided the big picture is adjudicated correctly.

Where I have problems with the judging community lagging behind the corps was in training. It became clear to me that most comments made, both positive and critical were gleaned from the judges general background as a music educator as opposed to something in a DCI adjudicator's training.

Frankly, I have a bigger issue with music judges not understanding and objectively evaluating the overall musical program (rock, pop) than I ever did with the guitar/bass/piano being correctly or incorrectly judged on an instrumental level, and that is a HUGE problem. Conversing with the judges after shows in 2009 it became readily apparent that most judges were incapable of objectively judging the music of Blue Man Group, Christina, Janet, etc. because it's simply not something most (not all) of them listen to on any kind of regular basis, let alone teach in their own middle school, high school, or collegiate band programs. We spent a lot of time trying to educate the panels, but until DCI mandates change in this area, I'm not hopeful for much positive change on the judging community's end.

For every judge that gave us positive feedback (and truly constructive criticism) regarding the guitar/bass/piano we had five truly ridiculous comments with regards to the overall program. Here's my all-time favorite. Sometime in 2009, we had a GE Music judge tell us we really needed to "jazz up" one particular section of the show. He insisted that we were taking the wrong "big band" approach to what we were doing. The piece? Justin Timberlake's "#### Girl".

I was completely dumbfounded.

[BRASSO]

A brief continuation and commentary, for what it's worth.

First, regarding Teal Sound last year: The corps on the field played well. Maybe even well enough to be 18th. (Maybe not.) The electronics and "non-traditional" instruments sat squarely on TOP of the ensemble sound, and were a distraction. Good performance but poor balance/blend, and questionable choices on tone distortion, with a sound system that was "okay" will always result in "that's kinda cool, but I'm not stepping out of my comfort zone with scoring as a judge".

It has to be done professionally.

While electronics may be relatively new to drum corps, they are not new to anyone's ears. We know when it sounds good, and when it does not. We've been listening to a blend of acoustic and electronic music literally since the day we were born.

A friend of mine reminded me of something Don Angelica once said: "Just because we borrow from all the other performing arts doesn't mean we do any of them particularly well."

To that end, Teal Sound is working on a more professional-sounding blend of electronic, acoustic and non-traditional instrumentation. The last couple of years can be considered an experiment, with lesson learned, and new directions implied.

It's not that judges don't have "guts". . . I have a great many friends in the judging community, and that is not something a single individual lacks, when you have to make decisions every single night of the summer. The corps have to be willing to hear and see things, and then figure out why a particular judge may have said something. It's detective work, which requires an honest, open self-evaluation sans ego.

Secondly, regarding the judging of individual performance on non-traditional instruments in drum corps: It is my understanding that at this time, the same judge who evaluates the pit (field percussion) is responsible for evaluating individual achievement from non-traditional instruments.

A synth is not so different from any other keyboard instrument, except in this way. There cannot be an evaluation of technique; only the criteria "does it sound good". For some that may be too vague. But consider this. Any technique is valid. What we do in drum corps is try to align techniques of individuals when they are playing in a section of other like-instruments (e.g. snare line, baritone line, etc.) But how many synths do you compare for matched technical achievement?

For some, this will not be an adequate answer. I get it.

So. . .

Here's the very real, plain and simple truth.

The ability to judge the latest technological and instrumental changes is not fully realized yet. Training and discussions happen.

A parallel from worlds we've already been to in our past: in 1980, Santa Clara Vanguard came out with ground-breaking drill, which didn't fit the vocabulary of the judging sheets at the time. They were writing and performing outside the box. It took a few years for the system to catch up, which began with the introduction of achievement build-up captions in some areas (not all) in 1984.

Another parallel: Dance. Lots of corps are credited with introducing elements of dance as far back as the 50's from what I can tell. In the DCI era, Santa Clara doing the Bottle Dance, the Bridgemen giving us a little "street" dance, Blue Devils with their sleek body work and feather dances from 1981 - 1984, Madison Scouts giving us the masculine interpretation of Gene Kelly and Broadway type foot-work while spinning rifles, and finally the highlight of the 80's Dance movement, Spirit of Atlanta, who had begun to work on dance probably as early as 1980 during "Sweet Georgia Brown", but defined Dance as a legitimate form of expression in drum corps. From there it steam-rolled. . . Phantom Regiment's work with ballet in the late 80's, solo dancers (again with ballet) in Garfield Cadet's 1987 "Appalachian Spring Suite", Dutch Boy's Vegas Dancers. . . even the goofy, fun version of African Break Dancing by the Velvet Knights in 1988 and the 1995 Madison Scouts in "Malaga" with the bull-fighter dance.

Should I mention how similar the Phantom Regiment's halt position is to Ballet's 4th position?

(Pardon the longest run-on sentence with no conclusion in recent memory.)

The point I will make with this is that the vocabulary and training of the judging system, the judges themselves were not ready to properly evaluate what they were being presented with. We tried. Didn't work. So, redesign the sheets, train the judges in vocabulary, teach them to recognize achievement. It takes time.

Same with non-traditional instruments today.

An important thing to know, is that a guitar player gets no more or less credit than any other individual from a field music standpoint. And for those corps that choose to highlight guitars, etc., it is no different that evaluating a show that is built around a great soloist. Pacing, exposure, expression, variety, etc., are all factors.

It is not enough to simply show up and plug something in.

Anyway, I'm sure this has wandered long enough. Sufficed to say that drum corps evaluation evolves, just as the drum corps performances do. They will always be a step behind, because it takes time to learn something new.

All for now -- gotta get back to actually working.

best,

Chuck Naffier

Thank you for taking the time to make your observations. It is an interesting read. I don't quite understand how most judges with a percussionist background and training can adequately judge a guitarist, nor conversely, how a musician whose training and experience is in playing a guitar prepares them to judge ( for example ) snare drum execution, demand, uniformity, etc. I have training in brass playing. But I wouldn't want my brass playing judged by someone with a Guard background, or a guitarist, or a percussionist. Oh well, as you said, the judging system is always in astate of flux to get it right. As I've said before on another thread, I don't stick around for the scores at most local shows anyway, as the whole procees is much too complicated, confusing, and subjective for my tastes. I just want to be entertained. That's why I never get upset with the scores and placements and all that stuff.

[arrangerx]

Wes -- sorry for hijacking the thread.

Chuck

[hammondbrass]

Perhaps my comments were misunderstood. I said " they are the most innovative unit in DCI". This makes them " different ". I did not call for units to " all be the same ". That would in fact be " boring " in my opinion. It's also pretty

clear they don't do" the same thing" as others. I do believe that they are a" band." I don't use that phrase as a pjorative, nor did I criticize them for being a " band ". I liked them last year as a matter of fact. I just used the phrase "a band " as a form of accuracy. They use a combo drum set, and a rock guitarist playing a rock guitar. There is noone that is not honest that would not recognize that such a unit as NOT being a " Band ", (as this is what some " Bands have ")..... Look, I mean no disrespect to the Teal Sound Band at all. Seriously. As far as Bands go, they are much closer to the conventional Drum and Bugle Corps than some other Bands out there. But surely, one must see that any unit that has drum set combo performers and guitars out front with brass marchers doing skits complementing the unit behind, that this is in fact a " band ". What's wrong with accuracy, where there was no attempt by me at all to disparage the Teal Sound Band, when in fact I complemented them on their uniqueness and innovativeness ?

I agree with you that Teal's core mission is to try and be an innovator within the activity. I just don't think they do it quite well enough yet to reap the rewards of the inherent "risk." I think they're betting that guitars/basses are the inevitable future of drum corps and it marries well with their rock-driven shows of the past like MeTealica. The only problem is that when BD, Cavies, or Cadets finally do a show centered around distortion guitars or heavy synth they're still going to look like the innovators. Teal will say, "yeah but we did first before it was cool or popular." And everyone else will say, "who cares?"

Still, you have to give them credit for carving out their own niche in an area that just recently became legal. A worthy adversary. I just think it's pandering to the untapped American Idol audience for drum corps. The purists think that drum by itself if enough to sell to a general audience. Well, not if we keep cutting music education while the recording industry is barfing up formulaic, saccerin sweet, mediocre, crap. The next thing you know, we'll have 3.5 minute-long shows, LED light-uniforms (like in the superbowl half-time), fireworks, holograms, and monster-trucks will be legal, and music will only be composed of notes from a single pentatonic scale - probably Bb since that's what most of them play in anyways. :)

I still don't think they're a band. It seems like you're just trying to be dickish on that one.

[mckdan]

I really think that Troopers will be the surprise corps this year. In 2009, they created a smaller corps which managed to pull off a surprising rise to the finals. In 2010 they struggled with a higher level program with a full corps. The challenges of increasing membership and increasing show difficulty will take about two years to really pull off. This means that 2011 will either mean a major rise, ala Madison, or a minor drop until the staff can finally create the perfect show again. I am pulling for a rapid and surprising rise for the corps.

[bccadet09]

This is flying under the radar.

[BRASSO]

The ability to judge the latest technological and instrumental changes is not fully realized yet. Training and discussions happen.

Sufficed to say that drum corps evaluation evolves, just as the drum corps performances do. They will always be a step behind, because it takes time to learn something new

best,

Chuck Naffier

I ( and I would assume others ) appreciate your insights here, Chuck. In my opinion however, it seems like we are putting the cart before the horse here, if we're looking for the judge to get the experience and training to adequately judge a musical instrument in competition AFTER that inexperienced judge is evaluating the instrument playing in competition. First things first, it seems to me. The judge of a musical instrument in competition should be qualified through training and experience BEFORE such judge is put in a position to judge the musical instrument. If the judge(s) are not prepared yet to properly judge the musical instrument, then don't introduce the musical instrument into the competition until the judges are properly trained and/ or experienced in that musical instrument. A percussion judge, by virtue of their percussion experience and training, is no more qualified to judge the rock guitar playing than say the Guard judge would be in judging percussion. It is ludicrous on it's face to have musical instruments played in competition in which the judges are " a step behind ", and their training and experience is " not fully realized yet ". If this is the case, then it's pretty clear that the judging of corps is a deal in which Corps are judged by judges that are " flying by the seat of their pants ", and only leads to fans raising their eyes in astonishment at the foolishness of such an endeavor of judging a musical instrument in competition in such a ridiculous fashion.

Edited March 29, 2011 by BRASSO

[GUARDLING]

I ( and I would assume others ) appreciate your insights here, Chuck. In my opinion however, it seems like we are putting the cart before the horse here, if we're looking for the judge to get the experience and training to adequately judge a musical instrument in competition AFTER that inexperienced judge is evaluating the instrument playing in competition. First things first, it seems to me. The judge of a musical instrument in competition should be qualified through training and experience BEFORE such judge is put in a position to judge the musical instrument. If the judge(s) are not prepared yet to properly judge the musical instrument, then don't introduce the musical instrument into the competition until the judges are properly trained and/ or experienced in that musical instrument. A percussion judge, by virtue of their percussion experience and training, is no more qualified to judge the rock guitar playing than say the Guard judge would be in judging percussion. It is ludicrous on it's face to have musical instruments played in competition in which the judges are " a step behind ", and their training and experience is " not fully realized yet ". If this is the case, then it's pretty clear that the judging of corps is a deal in which Corps are judged by judges that are " flying by the seat of their pants ", and only leads to fans raising their eyes in astonishment at the foolishness of such an endeavor of judging a musical instrument in competition in such a ridiculous fashion.

[/quot

Let me start by saying I am NOT a pecussion person at all but I am a designer as well as a judge in many venues. With that said I would agree somewhat with Chuck. I have seen this happen over and over everytime something new is addressed or a rule change made. Although ( Brasso ) you are right about the judge should know ahead of time but more often than not they flub their way through different understandings and interpretation differences. This has been on going for many years. Unfortunately the only ones who suffer through this all is the members. This is why opinions and #s can be all over the place, mainly because of plain ole opinion but also the opinion of the criteria as well as the interpretation. Vicious circle I'm afraid

As far as flying under the radar I've always felt SCV as visable and historical as they are they always seem to have a mystery to them as to where they will be in a given year. Part of their charm

[GUARDLING]

I ( and I would assume others ) appreciate your insights here, Chuck. In my opinion however, it seems like we are putting the cart before the horse here, if we're looking for the judge to get the experience and training to adequately judge a musical instrument in competition AFTER that inexperienced judge is evaluating the instrument playing in competition. First things first, it seems to me. The judge of a musical instrument in competition should be qualified through training and experience BEFORE such judge is put in a position to judge the musical instrument. If the judge(s) are not prepared yet to properly judge the musical instrument, then don't introduce the musical instrument into the competition until the judges are properly trained and/ or experienced in that musical instrument. A percussion judge, by virtue of their percussion experience and training, is no more qualified to judge the rock guitar playing than say the Guard judge would be in judging percussion. It is ludicrous on it's face to have musical instruments played in competition in which the judges are " a step behind ", and their training and experience is " not fully realized yet ". If this is the case, then it's pretty clear that the judging of corps is a deal in which Corps are judged by judges that are " flying by the seat of their pants ", and only leads to fans raising their eyes in astonishment at the foolishness of such an endeavor of judging a musical instrument in competition in such a ridiculous fashion.

oops!!!! sorry for double post

Let me start by saying I am NOT a pecussion person at all but I am a designer as well as a judge in many venues. With that said I would agree somewhat with Chuck. I have seen this happen over and over everytime something new is addressed or a rule change made. Although ( Brasso ) you are right about the judge should know ahead of time but more often than not they flub their way through different understandings and interpretation differences. This has been on going for many years. Unfortunately the only ones who suffer through this all is the members. This is why opinions and #s can be all over the place, mainly because of plain ole opinion but also the opinion of the criteria as well as the interpretation. Vicious circle I'm afraid

As far as flying under the radar I've always felt SCV as visable and historical as they are they always seem to have a mystery to them as to where they will be in a given year. Part of their charm

[BRASSO]

. Although ( Brasso ) you are right about the judge should know ahead of time but more often than not they flub their way through different understandings and interpretation differences. This has been on going for many years. Unfortunately the only ones who suffer through this all is the members.

I appreciate the honest candor, Chuck.

No musical instrument in competition should be judged by a judge not qualified by training or experience to adequately judge the playing.

Otherwise, just have the judge put on a blindfold and throw darts on the backwall of the judge's booth as to the score that judge gives in his or her caption. It would be no less subjective an enterprise, imo.

Edited March 29, 2011 by BRASSO