Sanford trophy vs. DCI ring

[charlie1223]

What you describe is still not 'objective' but actually still subjective; yes an educated musician can judge the differences between a poorly performing high school line and the 2013 Cadets (that is still subjective opinion based on interpreting language on the sheets but that is a discussion for another thread). But that is not the case when the 2013 SCV, 2013 BD, and 2013 Cadet lines went up against one another. That is a situation where 100% complete subjectivity from an educated judges opinion comes into play (also no line produces complete cleanness throughout the entire performance and the judge can miss or capture that depending on where he/she is on the field at any given moment). And as it applies to interpretation there are, for example, three basic ways a diddle can be performed: Slurred, Metronomic, and Closed. The philosophy of the judge will influence how that judge interprets the sheets, hears, and subjectively evaluates, those diddle passages even if each drum line is consistent and clean. 'Objective', on the other hand, would be something like this: Have each line stand in one spot exactly 50 feet away from a decibel meter; then have each line produce one shot in which the meter registers the amplitude; the line with the highest registered decibel level wins. That is objective. However once a judge begins to make evaluations on stick motion uniformity, fluid heights of accents and crescendos, phrasing, etc... it thus becomes completely subjective. Want to make baseball like DCI, do not count the ball objectively hit over the fence then the runner objectively touching home plate as a score; have judges utilize judging sheet criteria and base a scored run on a combination of the swing quality of the batter, the open-sound quality of the crack of the ball being hit by the bat, and how fluid the player runs around the bases, then baseball will be subjectively scored just like DCI.

Just because a human is evaluating facts does not mean its subjective. Just because it HARD to evaluate stuff like stick uniformity, fluid heights , accent and crescendos, phrasing doesn't mean it immediately "subjective". I am simply stating that though a lot of DCI is subjective opinion there is also a handful of things that are not. And the simple fact that categorizations of the performing arts are HARD to measure and that HUMANS evaluate them does not by default make them "subjective". If a judge makes a call that the drum-line lacks uniformity from player to player that is as much a statement of objective fact (if he/she is very well trained professional) as the decibel meter going off. We CAN get the camera out, do an instant replay and deduce, "oh yes, that was objectively correct! look its right on the camera!" We CAN judge CERTAIN things objectively given the criteria and given the training and there are aspects of DCI judging that require that but they are of course vague.

You say that ball going over the fence in baseball is objective. The Human categorizes that as a home-run. He evaluates the fact that the ball went over the fence during a game he invented call "baseball" and has objectively decided that when that happens it's a point for the team. Now, You have the first attack of show and you hear 2 sounds happening at two different times. That is what objectively happened. And according the rules in the invented game called DCI we decide that having 2 sounds happening at different times when the obvious intent was to produce 2 sounds at the sometime means there was a mistake. the objective call is that points will not be rewarded. It's something PHYSICAL that happens that isn't up to opinion. The attack was out. The ball went over the fence. We have standards to evaluate those things.

I will say that subjectivity comes in when you have to compare two groups but more specifically when they are similar in caliber (in the same ball park so to speak...) Comparing one tic in one corps to another tic in another corps can be debated. Corps A blew out a triplet roll, but another rushed the end of a phrase. Which is a worse tic? Which corps should be on top given only these errors? THAT is the subjective part. One corps played a very technical passage standing still perfectly clean and another played a slightly less technical passage while running and gunning also perfectly clean. Which achieved more? Debates to no end!

Edited September 27, 2013 by charlie1223

[drilltech1]

And now we return to the original question of Sanford or DCI ring while the thread hijackers pony up some guts to start their own discussion.

[Stu]

Just because a human is evaluating facts does not mean its subjective. Just because it HARD to evaluate stuff like stick uniformity, fluid heights , accent and crescendos, phrasing doesn't mean it immediately "subjective".

Nope, sorry; but human evaluation of factual events is, and always will be, subjective not objective. What you believe to be objectively true via observation, which is expressing or dealing with facts or conditions (as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations) is humanly impossible even for the most highly educated and experienced human. If human evaluation was objective there would never be any question or controversy over calls by refs and umps in sports; or questions or controversies over rulings in a court of law for that matter. This is why in all objective outcome sports the calls by refs and ups are kept as minimal as possible. Scoring in Drag Racing, for example, is 100% objective (electronic monitoring of the starting line to make sure the driver did not jump the start and electronic monitoring of the finish line with the first car to cross the finish line as being objectively determined as the winner) and while there is some some subjectivity of calls by humans on things like possible cheating which can cause a score to be disqualified, those calls do not alter the actual initial scoring of the time from the starting line to the finish line. Baseball and Football are around 95% objective in scoring because while the scoring is based on crossing the goal line or touching home plate there are times in which subjective calls are made by refs and umps (even the replay evaluation is subjective because the outcome is determined by human observation which can be incorrect). I actually lost interest in Boxing after watching the Marvin Hagler - Sugar Ray Leonard fight in 1987 where Hagler beat the crud, and I mean beat the crud out of Leonard in every round (and Leonard even was captured by cameras telling Hagler after the last round that Hagler had beat him); yet when the human scoring from the three judges was announced they had scored Leonard as the winner (if you want to see how subjective the scoring is in boxing read up on it). However, once human evaluation determines 'complete scoring' of an event like what is done in drum corps that scoring will always be influenced by human feelings, human prejudices, and human interpretation of factual information and thus the scoring will be 'completely subjective'. Hitting the drum is objective; and again if scoring was based on say the measured decibel level of that hit the score would be objective; nevertheless, a human judge 'evaluating' how well the drum was hit, and that evaluation determines the actual score, that score is subjective. Of course the impact of subjectivity can be minimized by having like-minded educated and experienced judges make the calls (for example drum judges like Prosperie and Howarth are pulled from like-minded backgrounds whereas DCI does not hire equally professional, yet philosophical different, guys like Jeff 'Tain' Watts or Steve Jordan); but still, those calls by Prosperie and Howarth are subjective evaluations of events based on personal interpretation of both the criteria on the sheets and the factual musical information presented to them in real time.

[Stu]

And now we return to the original question of Sanford or DCI ring while the thread hijackers pony up some guts to start their own discussion.

You are getting a little snarkey and testy there with accusations. Anyway, DCI ring; already answered that a long time ago.

[charlie1223]

Nope, sorry; but human evaluation of factual events is, and always will be, subjective not objective. What you believe to be objectively true via observation, which is expressing or dealing with facts or conditions (as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations) is humanly impossible even for the most highly educated and experienced human. If human evaluation was objective there would never be any question or controversy over calls by refs and umps in sports; or questions or controversies over rulings in a court of law for that matter. This is why in all objective outcome sports the calls by refs and ups are kept as minimal as possible. Scoring in Drag Racing, for example, is 100% objective (electronic monitoring of the starting line to make sure the driver did not jump the start and electronic monitoring of the finish line with the first car to cross the finish line as being objectively determined as the winner) and while there is some some subjectivity of calls by humans on things like possible cheating which can cause a score to be disqualified, those calls do not alter the actual initial scoring of the time from the starting line to the finish line. Baseball and Football are around 95% objective in scoring because while the scoring is based on crossing the goal line or touching home plate there are times in which subjective calls are made by refs and umps (even the replay evaluation is subjective because the outcome is determined by human observation which can be incorrect). I actually lost interest in Boxing after watching the Marvin Hagler - Sugar Ray Leonard fight in 1987 where Hagler beat the crud, and I mean beat the crud out of Leonard in every round (and Leonard even was captured by cameras telling Hagler after the last round that Hagler had beat him); yet when the human scoring from the three judges was announced they had scored Leonard as the winner (if you want to see how subjective the scoring is in boxing read up on it). However, once human evaluation determines 'complete scoring' of an event like what is done in drum corps that scoring will always be influenced by human feelings, human prejudices, and human interpretation of factual information and thus the scoring will be 'completely subjective'. Hitting the drum is objective; and again if scoring was based on say the measured decibel level of that hit the score would be objective; nevertheless, a human judge 'evaluating' how well the drum was hit, and that evaluation determines the actual score, that score is subjective. Of course the impact of subjectivity can be minimized by having like-minded educated and experienced judges make the calls (for example drum judges like Prosperie and Howarth are pulled from like-minded backgrounds whereas DCI does not hire equally professional, yet philosophical different, guys like Jeff 'Tain' Watts or Steve Jordan); but still, those calls by Prosperie and Howarth are subjective evaluations of events based on personal interpretation of both the criteria on the sheets and the factual musical information presented to them in real time.

This is obviously a philosophical question for you. You say that Hitting the Drum is objective. Atleast we agree to that point. It is. All normal human observers standing directly in-front of the drummer can say "That drum was hit". There can be an objective evaluation of what physically happened. Now why is suddenly not objective for that same observer to deduce that that snare drummer's hands are not in the correct position, that his sense of timing is off, that his sound quality is off? Are we having a disagreement in definitions? Objective doesn't mean: "an evaluation without any human interaction" it simply is one where the person's personal "feelings" and "biases" do not influence observation. It doesn't say anything about the intelligence of the human or how the human interprets information. If they are making purely data/fact based decisions (and this is easier when we are dealing with the basics) then it is objective. I feel the evaluation of individual groups can be PARTLY objective.And most of subjectivity that comes into play is when the evaluations of individual groups needs to be compared and number needs to be put on the performance. Then the judges own personally opinion about what is fundamental and what is actually high achievement come into play when putting one group over another.

[Stu]

... the snare drummer's hands are not in the correct position, that his sense of timing is off, that his sound quality is off...

This is subjective not objective because it is in the realm of opinion. Example of hand position: Let's say the snare line consists of 9 players and the right hand uniform grip is supposed to be German; at what point does a judge conclude that someones right hand is in the American Grip and not the German grip? 5 degrees rotation? 10 degrees? 30 degrees? 45 degrees? That opinion is left up to the judge and that is what makes it purely subjective.

Are we having a disagreement in definitions? Objective doesn't mean: "an evaluation without any human interaction"

Objective 'scoring' vs. Subjective 'scoring'. Example: In Speed Skating the first to cross the finish line wins and while the human evaluation plays a part in whether or not the winner cheated or broke the rules the human evaluation plays no part in the actual scoring (objective outcome scoring); however in Ice Dancing multiple judges evaluate everything with human opinion to create the scoring which is 100% based on those human observations (subjective outcome scoring).

...it simply is one where the person's personal "feelings" and "biases" do not influence observation.

Which is humanly impossible; we cannot completely separate and shut out those human issues because the way we evaluate situations is entirely based on personal experience and personal education. Example: Prosperie, Howerth, Griffen, Pipitone, etc... all have very similar backgrounds and experiences which allows for their feelings, bias, interpretations, etc... to also be similar as they evaluate as judges (but while their judging scores may be close to one another because they have similar feelings and biases even they cannot come to a complete agreement on all scoring).

It doesn't say anything about the intelligence of the human or how the human interprets information. If they are making purely data/fact based decisions (and this is easier when we are dealing with the basics) then it is objective. I feel the evaluation of individual groups can be PARTLY objective.

But a DCI judge is not making data/fact decisions and evaluating whether or not a math problem was done correctly. A DCI judge is interpreting rather vague language on judging sheets and evaluating subtle nuances differences in performance style of the highest caliber marching percussion sections in the world. That is purely subjective; and again why DCI wants judges who are as close to one another in experience, education, and philosophy as possible so as to minimize the variance in that personal subjectivity.

And most of subjectivity that comes into play is when the evaluations of individual groups needs to be compared and number needs to be put on the performance. Then the judges own personally opinion about what is fundamental and what is actually high achievement come into play when putting one group over another.

And ALL, I repeat ALL of the scoring within DCI is based on that personal evaluation where numbers and rankings are the judges own personal opinion about what is fundamental and what is actually high achievement when putting one group over another; which is, um, subjective.

[charlie1223]

This is subjective not objective because it is in the realm of opinion. Example of hand position: Let's say the snare line consists of 9 players and the right hand uniform grip is supposed to be German; at what point does a judge conclude that someones right hand is in the American Grip and not the German grip? 5 degrees rotation? 10 degrees? 30 degrees? 45 degrees? That opinion is left up to the judge and that is what makes it purely subjective.

Objective 'scoring' vs. Subjective 'scoring'. Example: In Speed Skating the first to cross the finish line wins and while the human evaluation plays a part in whether or not the winner cheated or broke the rules the human evaluation plays no part in the actual scoring (objective outcome scoring); however in Ice Dancing multiple judges evaluate everything with human opinion to create the scoring which is 100% based on those human observations (subjective outcome scoring).

Which is humanly impossible; we cannot completely separate and shut out those human issues because the way we evaluate situations is entirely based on personal experience and personal education. Example: Prosperie, Howerth, Griffen, Pipitone, etc... all have very similar backgrounds and experiences which allows for their feelings, bias, interpretations, etc... to also be similar as they evaluate as judges (but while their judging scores may be close to one another because they have similar feelings and biases even they cannot come to a complete agreement on all scoring).

But a DCI judge is not making data/fact decisions and evaluating whether or not a math problem was done correctly. A DCI judge is interpreting rather vague language on judging sheets and evaluating subtle nuances differences in performance style of the highest caliber marching percussion sections in the world. That is purely subjective; and again why DCI wants judges who are as close to one another in experience, education, and philosophy as possible so as to minimize the variance in that personal subjectivity.

And ALL, I repeat ALL of the scoring within DCI is based on that personal evaluation where numbers and rankings are the judges own personal opinion about what is fundamental and what is actually high achievement when putting one group over another; which is, um, subjective.

I appreciate the discussion even if I get red negatives... So, you think that if you hear two snare drums attack at two different times when the intent was to attack at the same time and the evaluator observed this as a "bad attack" that that is a subjective evaluation. That specific physical instance can be measured and based on the agreed upon standards of the marching arts community we evaluate that as incorrect... and to me that is "objective"... but wait...

If we are to be philosophical about this whole thing then yes, everything humans experience is subjective. We do not perceive anything directly and there are even delays (a fraction of a fraction of a second) to what we see with our eyes, hear with our ears, etc. In my example the position of the observer itself makes the evaluation subjective as from any other angle it may sound like they attacked together. Our senses are imperfect and there is no way for us to perceive our reality other than using our senses. It's certainly part of Solipsism where nothing outside of our own mind can even be proven to actually exist. Ultimate subjectivity!

I guess what I attempt to do in my discussion is to not be so archaic in the evaluation of "subjective" and "objective" and for real world imperfect purposes there's no need to say something is purely subjective or purely objective. It can be "somewhat" objective and "mostly subjective"... and though you may feel this a play on the words, the definitions themselves do not exclude humans from being objective but philosophically it does.

Edited September 27, 2013 by charlie1223

[drilltech1]

This is a dumb question.

Well for a dumb question as you call it or 'an absurd thread" as another early poster said it, it's gotten over 5K hits, and only half of those are Stu's.

[cowtown]

I think the mods need to clean up the poll results as I see many posters that are not percussionists voting and they all seem to be voting for a ring

I’d guess there are a few lines out there where many of the members would pick the Sanford over a ring, SCV’s line the past three years perhaps. Where as the lines at Blue Devils would want both and failing to win either, isn’t an option. Until last year, I’m guessing the Cadets line was in it for the ring….they may now get so Sanford chasers

Of course this only assumes you can make those lines but just trying out for these lines or these being your dream line probably indicates ones’ priorities to an extent

With Crown’s recent run at brass, could be interesting and bring a bit of parity by splitting the areas of talent across corps. Traditionally, guards were the least corps loyal and most prone to following corps CI trends in pursuit of rings.

I’ve always considered caption prizes as secondary

[Stu]

... So, you think that if you hear two snare drums attack at two different times when the intent was to attack at the same time and the evaluator observed this as a "bad attack" that that is a subjective evaluation.

Yes, because at what delay point would that attack turn into 'dirt'. Even back in the day of 'the tick' nobody could conclude with certainty what was and was not 'a tick'. All of that is subjective.

If we are to be philosophical about this whole thing then yes, everything humans experience is subjective.

Nope; if I experience a sudden stop on pavement at the end of a 200 foot free fall I will either die or be severely injured; that is objective, not subjective, human experience.

We do not perceive anything directly and there are even delays (a fraction of a fraction of a second) to what we see with our eyes, hear with our ears, etc. In my example the position of the observer itself makes the evaluation subjective as from any other angle it may sound like they attacked together. Our senses are imperfect and there is no way for us to perceive our reality other than using our senses. It's certainly part of Solipsism where nothing outside of our own mind can even be proven to actually exist. Ultimate subjectivity! I guess what I attempt to do in my discussion is to not be so archaic in the evaluation of "subjective" and "objective" and for real world imperfect purposes there's no need to say something is purely subjective or purely objective. It can be "somewhat" objective and "mostly subjective"... and though you may feel this a play on the words, the definitions themselves do not exclude humans from being objective but philosophically it does.

Observation and interpretation can occur based on objective criteria, I never stated any differently. However, when scoring and ranking, remember I am applying this to 'scoring and ranking', when scoring and ranking is based soley on human evaluation that variation in perception thus makes the outcome purely subjective. Fastest speed for a Downhill Skier is the basis for scoring and ranking in that activity (this yields objective outcome); however, a Snowboarder competition is evaluated on style, height, technique, etc... and those human observation and interpretation evaluations are the basis for score and ranking (this yields subjective outcome).

Edited September 27, 2013 by Stu