Semifinals Webcast chat

[Ghost]

Of the top 17 Corps placement positions from the Quarters, none of the placement positions changed here in the Semi's. How did you see it ?

http://www.drumcorpsplanet.com/forums/index.php/topic/147992-semifinals-webcast-chat/page__st__440

Read post #456. Now, will it stay the same three nights in a row, or will at least one position change?

[ktdoon324]

Wow, I had the same thing happen to me tonight. Lady next to me sat with her arms folded for almost the last 4 hours! I would clap and she would lean away. What ever! There were several people who had absolutely no emotion after Madison, Phantom and Crown. Nothing! They DID get up and leave real quick before the Dutch corps started. Sad, Jubal (I think that was their name?) was really good!

The other moment I liked was when we were asked to stand for a moment of silence for the deaths in Japan. Several refused to participate there too.

But, it's a free nation - I just don't understand theirs.

...and I'm gonna get thrown out of LOS tomorrow. Clapping, shouting and standing.

I'll #### a lot of people off.

Yes! You seem like someone I'd want to sit around! Haha. A couple with some old Bridgemen and Star jackets came at sat in front of us before SCV I think, and it all definitely got better. But it got to the point when I would yell something like "YEAH!!", a couple of people would look over and shake their head at me, like it's a problem that I'm too excited about this. Are you serious right now?! If there is anything like this tonight, I'll probably just yell even louder. Maybe they'll go away then.

[saxfreq1128]

The corps marches spectacularly. The corps plays spectacularly. As always, they will maintain their status as the EXECUTION corps. IMO, the design is lacking. Based on that premise (not fact), I came up with a theory as to why BD would never change their formula due to their competitive success. I still have not seen anyone post contradictory information (facts). All i've seen is alot of butthurt alumns and diehard fans that get all bent out of shape when someone has a slightly (SLIGHTLY) negative opinion about a portion of the BD program. Get over it. Is this putting down the organization? I don't think so. It isn't taking away any rings or bragging rights. I'm sure it gets old hearing the same complaints over and over about the visual design. Hmmmm, maybe the complainers have a point. Maybe not. But I did post a logical theory with the subtext of .. why on earth would they change the recipe if it keeps working? You guys need to read between the lines more often instead of stopping on a small set of words that you don't like .. and open up the whine jug.

FWIW, I'm a BD (and Cadets) fan, and I found your post respectable, though I do politely disagree. Also I found many of the responses to it good reminders of why I tend to deliberately avoid this place during finals week. But that's another story. I have two quick responses to your theory, speaking entirely for myself and not the judging community.

The first is that BD's visual design from beginning to end -- beyond just the 'big' impact moments -- is usually more memorable, for me. And I don't think we should discount memorability. Yes: they absolutely do it by simplifying their design to a few big ideas that evolve over time, but it's the evolution of the ideas that, I think, the judges find appealing. For some other top corps, I could absolutely describe the 'big' moments; but the trajectory of how and why they led into those moments doesn't usually stick with me. BD has fewer 'big' moments, and many fewer cogs in the visual wheel. Purposefully. I like BD's drill because it always feels like they're working through some larger visual idea, rather than constantly working up to a difficult/fancy climax with drill that isn't meant to be as memorable. Both design philosophies are effective and legitimate, to me. It's a matter of preference; and, for the judges, a matter of who's doing it most effectively.

The second was proven at semifinals, incidentally, and has nothing to do with BD specifically. I don't find excessive difficulty particularly sexy, and the idea of MM of top corps taking tumbles during finals week is not very appealing to me. It just isn't. I find it distracting. It pulls me out of the experience and makes me worry about the people on the field, not least because I know it has nothing to do with lack of training. Point being: for some people here, it seems that good design is measured in terms of difficulty, and I think they're romanticizing (needless?) difficulty.

[soccerguy315]

thanks for mentioning this (re: crossmen)

Edited August 13, 2011 by soccerguy315

[byline]

FWIW, I'm a BD (and Cadets) fan, and I found your post respectable, though I do politely disagree. Also I found many of the responses to it good reminders of why I tend to deliberately avoid this place during finals week. But that's another story. I have two quick responses to your theory, speaking entirely for myself and not the judging community.

The first is that BD's visual design from beginning to end -- beyond just the 'big' impact moments -- is usually more memorable, for me. And I don't think we should discount memorability. Yes: they absolutely do it by simplifying their design to a few big ideas that evolve over time, but it's the evolution of the ideas that, I think, the judges find appealing. For some other top corps, I could absolutely describe the 'big' moments; but the trajectory of how and why they led into those moments doesn't usually stick with me. BD has fewer 'big' moments, and many fewer cogs in the visual wheel. Purposefully. I like BD's drill because it always feels like they're working through some larger visual idea, rather than constantly working up to a difficult/fancy climax with drill that isn't meant to be as memorable. Both design philosophies are effective and legitimate, to me. It's a matter of preference; and, for the judges, a matter of who's doing it most effectively.

The second was proven at semifinals, incidentally, and has nothing to do with BD specifically. I don't find excessive difficulty particularly sexy, and the idea of MM of top corps taking tumbles during finals week is not very appealing to me. It just isn't. I find it distracting. It pulls me out of the experience and makes me worry about the people on the field, not least because I know it has nothing to do with lack of training. Point being: for some people here, it seems that good design is measured in terms of difficulty, and I think they're romanticizing (needless?) difficulty.

I find myself agreeing with much of what you have posted (especially the difficulty/demand aspect, collisions/falls, worrying about the performers on the field and wondering whether it's worth the risk, even on an artistic/competitive level). Thanks for a well-thought-out, reasoned reply!

[fsubone]

I was just checking out the webcast, and did anyone else notice a "skip" in SCV's show on the high-rate webcast? The show jumps like 5-10 seconds, in the closer. From before the Vanguard yell, to just a bit after, when they start the "staircase" set, it jumps.

[POSITIVenrgy]

I was just checking out the webcast, and did anyone else notice a "skip" in SCV's show on the high-rate webcast? The show jumps like 5-10 seconds, in the closer. From before the Vanguard yell, to just a bit after, when they start the "staircase" set, it jumps.

Yes, my screen froze last night and I scrambled to get it going again. It looked to me as though it wasn't my computer, but the webcast. All I had was the DCI logo on my screen. By the time I thought to switch to the regular stream, instead of the beta, it was on again. Wasn't sure what had happened. I was so bummed, because it was the very show I was waiting to see!