Change to Judging

[Lincoln]

Is this like the Reeses commercial from the 80's where one person bangs into another and their chocolate and peanut butter mix?

"You put GE Visual in the GE Music!"

"You put GE Music in the GE Visual!"

Edited March 11, 2014 by LincolnV

[JoshClements403]

Personally I like the change and I hope this is a stepping stone to a bigger and better change to judging maybe within the next couple years or so

[charlie1223]

Charlie, I did enjoy the Dada show in a massively twisted way. Then again, I did say when all the discussion was going on that I'm a massive Dada fan, and I also understood why most folks loathed it, too.

Edited March 11, 2014 by charlie1223

[troon8]

"Audience Engagement" vs. "Engaged the Audience?"

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight................

The differences between the two make sense on the explanation sheet to me (if, from what I understand, the repertoire side is the "what" and the performance side is the "how effectively,") but if you only look at those two headings, they really need to come up with some more nuanced phrasing to differentiate them from each other.

Edited March 11, 2014 by troon8

[Stu]

From my experience with listening to DCI GE tapes the judges already considers the audience. There will be comments like "wow, the crowd is really getting into it" or "you didn't quite excite the crowd in the way you were anticipating". A lot of their analysis is technical yes but if a corps is really kicking ### they can't help but have their inner "fan" reaction to a show.

The GE judges may be recording comments about crowd reaction, but it really has not affected their scoring evaluations. This is what actually occurs:

"Wow, the crowd is really getting into it" - score based on 'my personal sense' of technical engagement 18.7

"You didn't quite excite the crowd in the way you were anticipating" - score based on 'my personal sense' of technical engagement 19.8

Edited March 11, 2014 by Stu

[DrumManTx]

The problem with GE is there is a helluva lot of grey area for what is perceived as "entertaining" and "effective". Music and visual, for the most part, can be judged pretty accurately because if you suck, I mean it's obvious. Yes there are different techniques and approaches to visual and music performance, but they are measurable for the most part because you can see and hear the level of achievement. Year in year out in the marching band, WGI, and Drum corps world I see countless groups score top marks in performance and a good few places lower in GE. I realize that in some cases the show is a bad product being performed at maximum effect, but not all the time. I dunno. I'll believe this is working when groups like Madison, Surf, ect. are scoring somewhat higher in General Effect. Not saying they have to be 1st, but come on, if we're looking through the eyes of an audience member, you'd have to be blind, deaf, and dumb to not see that they are more effective than they have been scored in the past.

Edited March 11, 2014 by DrumManTx

[GUARDLING]

The problem with GE is there is a helluva lot of grey area for what is perceived as "entertaining" and "effective". Music and visual, for the most part, can be judged pretty accurately because if you suck, I mean it's obvious. Yes there are different techniques and approaches to visual and music performance, but they are measurable for the most part because you can see and hear the level of achievement. Year in year out in the marching band, WGI, and Drum corps world I see countless groups score top marks in performance and a good few places lower in GE. I realize that in some cases the show is a bad product being performed at maximum effect, but not all the time. I dunno. I'll believe this is working when groups like Madison, Surf, ect. are scoring somewhat higher in General Effect. Not saying they have to be 1st, but come on, if we're looking through the eyes of an audience member, you'd have to be blind to not see that they are more effective than they have been scored in the past.

your last line is merely an opinion and also an assumption that audience appeal doesnt change night to night...it does , sometimes drastically...and more effective than who?...we are judged against each other......also , in this activity,...there was a time...longggggggggggggggggggggggggg before you ever heard of drum corps ( hate to admit I was there ..lol ) that the activity thought everything was measurable ( the tic system ) it was a hot mess then...worse than now....it was still all subjective..........sure you can seperate real bad from real good but anything in the neighborhood of either became extremely subjective

Edited March 11, 2014 by GUARDLING

[Jeff Ream]

theres no difference here..at all....just on a piece of paper now.......and one assumes that GE judges will agree with an audience?..hmmm.....ok..............we'll see , its only a few months

audio to visual coordination is already there. it's smoke and mirrors.

[GUARDLING]

audio to visual coordination is already there. it's smoke and mirrors.

yes......its all there already

[DrumManTx]

your last line is merely an opinion and also an assumption that audience appeal doesnt change night to night...it does , sometimes drastically...and more effective than who?...we are judged against each other......also , in this activity,...there was a time...longggggggggggggggggggggggggg before you ever heard of drum corps ( hate to admit I was there ..lol ) that the activity thought everything was measurable ( the tic system ) it was a hot mess then...worse than now....it was still all subjective..........sure you can seperate real bad from real good but anything in the neighborhood of either became extremely subjective

That's the problem, what is the benchmark of what is effective? I have my opinion, which isn't shared and perceived the same way by everyone, so how do we judge it? Not disagreeing, but that kinda proves my point.

Edited March 11, 2014 by DrumManTx