Carolina Crown 2013

[MikeD]

Since some people keep referring others to the source music to explain what Crown is doing, I'd like to reiterate the point that TheClutch made in the Mesa thread: it's quite reasonable to decide that the original material is no good!

Well, here is a snippet from a NY Times review of a recent production....

Today, maybe more than ever, "Einstein" comes across as an original, visionary and generous work, anything but polemical. There are certainly moments of ominous intensity, especially the apocalyptic final scene of Act IV, "Spaceship," in which we are taken inside the vehicle that has cruised above the action in earlier scenes.

The music evokes the inevitable consequences of Einstein's work: a nuclear blast. Cast members with their backs to the audience fiddle with blinking lights on a three-tiered control board as the accumulated sound becomes a hard-driving, breathless blur of indistinct, rapid-fire numbers backed up by threatening blasts from the swelling electric keyboards and frenetic woodwinds, all under the sure conducting of Michael Riesman.

Yet there is no anger in "Einstein." In the "Night Train" scene, where we see (or so it seems) the young Einstein and his wife in a romantic moment on a train trip, the breathless vocal duet ends with the woman (Ms. Davis) pulling a gun on her mate (Gregory R. Purnhagen). But in the way she smiles and gloats the move seems just a play in a continuing gender battle.

The two trial scenes are highlights of the piece. Mr. Wilson blurs images of a laboratory experiment and a courtroom, with judges in wigs and witnesses watching with brown-bag lunches. On the floor before the judge is a huge, luminous bed. Many metaphors and questions come together here. A lab experiment is a kind of trial. Did Einstein dream up his theories at night? Did fears of the implications of his work give him nightmares?

In the second trial, Ms. Moran, playing a witness, lounges on the bed reciting over and over some incantatory words written by Ms. Childs, a riff about finding herself in a "prematurely air-conditioned supermarket" and seeing colored bathing caps. And, she explains, daftly, "I wasn't tempted to buy one, but I was reminded of the fact that I had been avoiding the beach." Sometimes, such wandering thoughts are subjected to intense scrutiny in a trial. Eventually, her character turns into a weapon-wielding Patty Hearst, whose real-life trial was going when "Einstein" was created.

It is hard to know how to categorize this production. Since the sets of the 1992 revival were destroyed, this production meticulously reconstructs the original, with up-to-date lighting and technology. It includes the dazzling choreography for the opera's two extended ballet sequences that Ms. Childs created for the 1984 revival and have been used since.

I am still not convinced that "Einstein on the Beach" would lose any of its mystical allure, vitality and wonderment if it were trimmed a bit. Maybe more than a bit. For musical richness, I prefer Mr. Glass's "Satyagraha." Yet "Einstein" invites you to let your mind wander. Plenty of operas have that effect without intending it.

Reviews of most things span a wide variety from great to terrible. it doesn't really say much either way to use one as proof something is good or bad.

[the lone ranger]

It ought to be obvious that it takes more guts, is riskier, is braver, etc., to have singers perform live than to prerecord them. People on these forums have been arguing against the use samples for that very reason. Why should Crown be exempt from the same criticism other corps got before them?

It's June 21st , crown does practically all the voice in the show live. Especially the exposed very, very hard parts. There are only a couple spots that are sampled and those are sole samples that would be easy to do live. It's just a choice. Crown does the stuff that will get them positive credit live. And maybe giving them more than three weeks to put the entire show on the field before the masses think its dci ready, as well as a vocal layer that is fresh and innovative for the activity, of which no one has ever attempting fusing vocals into the fabric of the music the way that crown is attempting.

Maybe for some people, this is their way of feeling involved by complaining. And offering suggestions that would make them stay and watch the show instead of going to get a hotdog.

I mean really. Are people going to kick and scream when corps don't have the closer finished this weekend? I can hear it all now! Stop acting like its dci finals, let these groups have some time to produce and flesh out design decisions. Be a fan and enjoy what you can early season. If you want to be a designer then go do that. But pages of complaining about a couple counts of sampled voice vs live voice is ridiculous. Several years ago just having voice period was taboo and would supply pages and pages of complaining that dci was going to die and lose its fan base. .... Now I guess it just has to be live... Hmm progress :-)

[seen-it-all]

I mean really. Are people going to kick and scream when corps don't have the closer finished this weekend?

Oh, don't be surprised to read a few "it's a slap in the face to the fans" comments in the reviews if a corps dares to not march a complete drill. Or if they don't have all their show silks yet. It happens every year.

[DrumManTx]

It's June 21st , crown does practically all the voice in the show live. Especially the exposed very, very hard parts. There are only a couple spots that are sampled and those are sole samples that would be easy to do live. It's just a choice. Crown does the stuff that will get them positive credit live. And maybe giving them more than three weeks to put the entire show on the field before the masses think its dci ready, as well as a vocal layer that is fresh and innovative for the activity, of which no one has ever attempting fusing vocals into the fabric of the music the way that crown is attempting.

Maybe for some people, this is their way of feeling involved by complaining. And offering suggestions that would make them stay and watch the show instead of going to get a hotdog.

I mean really. Are people going to kick and scream when corps don't have the closer finished this weekend? I can hear it all now! Stop acting like its dci finals, let these groups have some time to produce and flesh out design decisions. Be a fan and enjoy what you can early season. If you want to be a designer then go do that. But pages of complaining about a couple counts of sampled voice vs live voice is ridiculous. Several years ago just having voice period was taboo and would supply pages and pages of complaining that dci was going to die and lose its fan base. .... Now I guess it just has to be live... Hmm progress :-)

Amen....

[MPutnam]

This show is definitely going to be polarizing. People will fall into either the love it or hate it camp with few left sitting on the fence.

I wonder what type of posts we would have seen in these forums back in 1993 when Star Of Indiana debuted their "Medea" show? Many of the things that people complained about them doing then are now commonplace in today's programs. This activity is always in flux, always evolving. Will Crown's 2013 production be a pivotal moment in DCI's history or just a footnote? I don't know, but it's going to be a great summer of drum corps either way!

[skywhopper]

Most corps are opting to have lower numbers in the lower brass sections because they can easily turn up the bass on their synth. Now, how is that NOT gutless (and moving in an odd direction activity wise) but having a mere two sections of Crown's show with sampled CROWN PERFORMERS, gutless?

I also think it's gutless to use synth bass.

Gutless? What does that mean?

It was the friendliest word I could come up with. "Cowardly" seems too strong. "Wimpy" doesn't really convey my meaning. Other possibilities are borderline vulgar and I'd rather not use them.

It means they are making a safe design choice instead of a bold one. Probably I chose the term because some folks have said they'd rather the vocals sound pristine than be performed live. If that's the reason Crown's designers chose to go with a sample for "Bern, Switzerland, 1905" or even for just the simple counting, then they're being gutless. ie, they have no "guts" ie they are afraid, and this activity is all about overcoming fear and putting it out there and taking risks and doing something incredible. Sampled audio was incredible for all of 10 minutes in the 80s. Live performance will never lose its luster.

The voice in this show is so integral to the overall feel and flow of this show. The fact that they are actually going over and above any other show I've seen vocalizing to date shows great dedication and COURAGE. Not gutlessness. The subtleties and intricacies of EotB calls for huge concentration for long periods of time. I'm actually surprised they are using live performers at all.

I agree it's bold and courageous to go with live narration. I also think it's lame and gutless to go with sampled voice. So, I've tried to make the distinction. The drum feature with the four singers doing the numbers, the intro and the ballad narration are all very bold, courageous choices. Making design choices that do nothing but eliminate performance risk is lame. If they sampled a trumpet solo in place of a real one, I would say that was gutless, no matter how many other exposed trumpet parts were in the show. This is no different. Live, amplified voice is legal. If you want amplified voice in your show, use the skills of the 150 incredible young adults you have in your corps, don't wimp out and sample it to avoid sounding out of breath or because it's easier.

I think you have put up a wall and have decided not to enjoy this show. To each his/her own. Enjoy the rest of the season!

I love the show, so perhaps you aren't paying very close attention.

Edited June 21, 2013 by skywhopper

[N.E. Brigand]

Well, here is a snippet from a NY Times review of a recent production...

[comments praising the 2012 revival, though including the suggestion that it would benefit from cutting]

Reviews of most things span a wide variety from great to terrible. it doesn't really say much either way to use one as proof something is good or bad.

I didn't cite Simon's review to "prove" that Einstein on the Beach is bad. That should have been clear from my statement that one valid response to Simon's review is to decide that he's wrong.

I cited Simon's review in defiance of claims that Crown's show must be good, or must include certain elements, simply because some people like the source material, or because the source material included those elements. (Another example, not specific to Crown: just because the music for Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon features a cello solo, that doesn't mean that the best possible marching band adaptation of the song needs to include a (miked) cello.) If an audience member doesn't like some aspect of Crown's show, it is no defense to say, "But that's how it was done in the opera house!"

I am amused to find that the Times review you cite supports one of my suggested responses: that EotB in its original form may be too long--and therefore may improve by being done in a short drum corps show!

[cowtown]

I don’t eat fish. Never have. People always try to tell me what I’m missing and tempt me with it and every few years I try a bite and then throw up.

Even with all the different ways to prepare it, all the health benefits, and all the research study it makes me gag

[skywhopper]

Since some people keep referring others to the source music to explain what Crown is doing, I'd like to reiterate the point that TheClutch made in the Mesa thread: it's quite reasonable to decide that the original material is no good!

Yes! Thank you!

One is that he's wrong--or, if you prefer, that tastes differ. Glass has many admirers. A friend of mine who professionally reviews classical music in the San Francisco area enjoys Glass's music for some of the very reasons that Simon disparages. (And as Simon himself has written more than once, the final arbiter is time. Check back in a hundred years and Glass may be as admired as Beethoven or remembered only in obscure footnotes.) Also, I suspect that some people might agree with Simon's verdict on Einstein but not with his enjoyment of Honegger or Bartok (BRASSO, I'm looking at you).

EotB is some of the hardest of Glass's works to enjoy. I certainly hold nothing against anyone who doesn't care for it. Honestly, Crown has taken only the very best bits and given only the tiniest sampling of the material. The core of the opera is seemingly endless repetition that would drive the vast majority of people insane. Even on the vastly trimmed-down recordings, with some of the scenes held down to half or less of their intended length, yet still exceeding the length of a drum corps performance by more than double. There's no way to capture that element of EotB on the field. Instead, Crown has captured the signature nonsense narration and counting along with the most sensible of the storytelling segments (be glad they didn't choose the story about the little boy who was too embarrassed to say "A & Peeeeeeee", my sisters).

For myself, I haven't seen the show, not even on video. I may enjoy it very much, although as a general rule, I dislike amplified voice in drum corps very much, and sampled voice even more. But maybe this show will change my mind, or those aspects will seem only minor blemishes on an otherwise brilliant production.

I personally think the four singers counting at mikes during the drum feature is probably the greatest possible use of amplified voice we'll ever see in drum corps--that is, it's used as percussion, and doesn't jar your brain out of enjoying the music that's going on. The nonsense narration at the beginning doesn't really bother me because it's set against musical nothingness and it so totally captures EotB's opening and closing Knee plays. The sensible narration over beautiful music in the ballad is unfortunate. And although I love that part of EotB and Crown's narrator does a good job with the material, they cut out the part I like best (ie, all the rest of the poem after "Impossible, you say.") and they've trimmed out a lot of the verbal baroqueness that adds to the charm of the original, as does the original's use of a world-weary-old-man-sounding narrator. That combined with the left-brain/right-brain block I get with spoken words over music, means I don't enjoy the ballad in this show with the narration nearly as much as I do without it.

All that is to say, finally, that overall I like this show. Much as I enjoyed Rach Star, because the piano features were actually impressive and well integrated and were clearly a highly challenging part for Nick, despite my general disgust with the overuse of synths. I think Crown has once again showed they have one of the most talented music staffs in drum corps, able to integrate the worst elements the rules allow in a way that's still enjoyable.

Edited June 21, 2013 by skywhopper

[the lone ranger]

I also think it's gutless to use synth bass.

It was the friendliest word I could come up with. "Cowardly" seems too strong. "Wimpy" doesn't really convey my meaning. Other possibilities are borderline vulgar and I'd rather not use them.

It means they are making a safe design choice instead of a bold one. Probably I chose the term because some folks have said they'd rather the vocals sound pristine than be performed live. If that's the reason Crown's designers chose to go with a sample for "Bern, Switzerland, 1905" or even for just the simple counting, then they're being gutless. ie, they have no "guts" ie they are afraid, and this activity is all about overcoming fear and putting it out there and taking risks and doing something incredible. Sampled audio was incredible for all of 10 minutes in the 80s. Live performance will never lose its luster.

I agree it's bold and courageous to go with live narration. I also think it's lame and gutless to go with sampled voice. So, I've tried to make the distinction. The drum feature with the four singers doing the numbers, the intro and the ballad narration are all very bold, courageous choices. Making design choices that do nothing but eliminate performance risk is lame. If they sampled a trumpet solo in place of a real one, I would say that was gutless, no matter how many other exposed trumpet parts were in the show. This is no different. Live, amplified voice is legal. If you want amplified voice in your show, use the skills of the 150 incredible young adults you have in your corps, don't wimp out and sample it to avoid sounding out of breath or because it's easier.

I love the show, so perhaps you aren't paying very close attention.

Perhaps everyone is paying too much attention... To your posts. Your post is a gutless joke, get over it, my god. if crown was gutless in anyway they would not be attempting this show. Period.