New DCI judges?

[Zeke]

and the after show critiques were more like running the gauntlet when the 52 member staffs would "discuss" with the few judges, one on 20, etc. That's why the critiques were stopped although the excuse of travel times and social communication alternatives were told to the public.

Critiques..it was always interesting to see the staff come back from critiques and whom had been kicked out..haha. I too wonder if those were the reasons they 86'd critique.

[fsthnds]

and the after show critiques were more like running the gauntlet when the 52 member staffs would "discuss" with the few judges, one on 20, etc. That's why the critiques were stopped although the excuse of travel times and social communication alternatives were told to the public.

So back on the topic, who are the persons you suggest will stand up to these practices, give honest numbers, and not be a zillion years old to do this?

All I know is that the anyone who will stand up and judge what they see and hear fairly will NOT be judging for very long! They come along and do 1 or 2 shows and are never hired by the coordinator and DCI again

[BRASSO]

Critiques..it was always interesting to see the staff come back from critiques and whom had been kicked out..haha. I too wonder if those were the reasons they 86'd critique.

I think it was Scott Stewart of the Madison Scouts that back in the 80's, 90's simply refused to go to the post show judging tent critiques. I think his famous quote was along the lines of " I look up into the stands after my Corps performs and it really tells me everything I really need to know. " . His stubborness probably did not help him and his corps with the judging community at the time, but I did admire his boldness and frank honesty about how he felt and looked at things. I found it quite refreshing as a matter of fact. He epidomizes the word " Maverick ", imo. Some today think that Stewart was behind the times then. But the future may look upon him in a different light. Future generations might just find that he was perhaps actually ahead of his time. ( that is, if we can find a way to regrow and renergize the national audience and therby keep the future activity alive. )

Edited June 28, 2013 by BRASSO

[GREENBLUE]

I believe last year Saucedo judged some shows. Can't remember if Cavies were in attendance. Don't think there was any controversy. Maybe past designers/arrangers would be the way to go? But again maybe not, all critiques might be comparisons on how they would've done it.

Edited June 28, 2013 by GREENBLUE

[N.E. Brigand]

Critiques... it was always interesting to see the staff come back from critiques and whom had been kicked out... haha. I too wonder if those were the reasons they 86'd critique.

I think it was Scott Stewart of the Madison Scouts who back in the '80s-'90s simply refused to go to the post-show judging tent critiques. I think his famous quote was along the lines of, "I look up into the stands after my Corps performs, and it really tells me everything I really need to know." His stubbornness probably did not help him and his corps with the judging community at the time, but I did admire his boldness and frank honesty about how he felt and looked at things. I found it quite refreshing, as a matter of fact. He epitomizes the word "maverick", imo. Some today think that Stewart was behind the times then. But the future may look upon him in a different light. Future generations might just find that he was perhaps actually ahead of his time (that is, if we can find a way to regrow and re-energize the national audience and thereby keep the future activity alive.)

Interestingly, I gather that the pendulum may have swung too far in the other direction, with the staff now lecturing to the judges about the nature of their shows. Didn't garfield mention a couple years ago having listened in on one of these sessions at his show and having found the staff comments incredibly condescending?

[BRASSO]

My family and others say I have to apologize and I agree that I was being a smark alek. I was just trying to use the example of someone who has started judging drum corps when she was just about out of marching eligibility herself. But you are right. It's not about the past but the future.

I find the OP's question challenging.

You're a stand up guy with this. As a result, I'm tossing you one of my green chips on my side of the table, big guy.

[garfield]

I sold some extra finals tickets to a pair of buddies for several years, both band directors from southern states. One of them was judging already and now judges the field at finals. He can't be older than 35 or 36.

My brother has been a band director for 30 years and has been judging on George's tour for several years. He's working his way up to the DCI level, but he's already 55. In thinking about him I wonder if the key to judging is not "younger" as much as it is "different".

Fresh eyes and perspective don't have to be young. And I'll be the older eyes (like my brother's) handle critique and criticism more calmly and consistently.

[trumpetcam]

I think there are a number of good ones that are younger. There are several former brass and percussion caption heads judging and former well known performers (JJ piptone, jeff prosperie,albert lo, etc) who are among the ranks. Many of these folks seem to be bringing a performer and teacher angle to the activity and don't seem to be overly influenced by the wayne downeys and george hopkins of the world.

My main issue is that many of the young ones never judge past july and you see that same names during finals week. Sure, they have the experience, but I think we lose out on fresh ideas and judges who may call things more wide open on a given night. Im sure some of the newer judges are more than competent to judge later in the season, it just seems to be a lot of the "good old boy" system still in play during the big shows.

There certainly are some dinosaurs out there, but all in all I think the judging community is in pretty good hands for the future and on the upward swing again.

Edited June 29, 2013 by trumpetcam

[drilltech1]

I think there are a number of good ones that are younger. There are several former brass and percussion caption heads judging and former well known performers (JJ piptone, jeff prosperie,albert lo, etc) who are among the ranks. Many of these folks seem to be bringing a performer and teacher angle to the activity and don't seem to be overly influenced by the wayne downeys and george hopkins of the world.

My main issue is that many of the young ones never judge past july and you see that same names during finals week. Sure, they have the experience, but I think we lose out on fresh ideas and judges who may call things more wide open on a given night. Im sure some of the newer judges are more than competent to judge later in the season, it just seems to be a lot of the "good old boy" system still in play during the big shows.

There certainly are some dinosaurs out there, but all in all I think the judging community is in pretty good hands for the future and on the upward swing again.

I'm pretty sure the 3 judges you mention are now very frequently used during Championships. In fact, JJ Pipitone is quite a legend with the Cadets percussion score, if I recall it correctly. In fact, his mother wouldn't talk to him for a month after, or something like that. And Albert Lo distinctly is in my memory for the ways he greeted the age outs and performers. Class act always.

[ShortAndFast]

In some ways the pool of possible judges are obvious: successful band directors, dance instructors, former corps staff, etc. You can reasonably object that these people don't match the experience as judges compared to the current pool, but there's only one way to gain that experience: to work as judges.

I think DCI would be better served by a broader pool of somewhat-less-experienced judges. More perspectives make it more likely that a broader range of show designs will be rewarded.

Ultimately I think the corps themselves need to evolve their thinking on this - right now there's too much fear of volatility in judging. The corps want to see consistent numbers night to night, which means that the judges must (a) weight the design heavily, since performances always change and (b) reward more-or-less the same things. It's easy to see why the judge pool remains small and clique-ish.