Narration -- Do designers think audiences are now more accepting?

[HornTeacher]

As great as music is, it isn't very descriptive. The use of titles to prime a person to experience the music in a certain way is a part of the communication. And obviously the use of speech does the same thing, giving descriptions that are otherwise impossible to articulate through music alone and to prime listeners and inviting them to a different experience. It changes the meaning of a piece of music and its one of the main reasons why themes are so prevalent in DCI shows.

You combine words and music and it can create very chilling and dramatic experiences. Like this mash-up of "time" from the Inception Soundtrack and the speech from "The Great Dictator".

As a life-long musician, I would agree with some of what you are saying. However...

Sit down and listen to whatever your favorite rendition of Barber's "Adagio For Strings" might be. After listening, ask yourself the following questions:

(1) Was it descriptive of a mood, emotion, or setting which might have driven Samuel Barber to write this? (In other words, was it, in fact, an "Adagio" for "Strings"?

(2) Was it crucial for you to arrive at your conclusion to point (1) without narration?

(3) Did the tone, timbre, or tempo of "Adagio For Strings" lead you to a relative understanding of the moods which might have driven Barber to write this piece?

(4) Did the words "Adagio For Strings" solely prime you in experiencing the piece in a way that Barber intended, or that you intended to see it as being BEFORE you heard it?

(5) Was it possible for you to comprehend, or try to comprehend, the mood or message that Barber was trying to convey through his composition?

(6) If there was an accompanying narrative of "One fine day, two lovers set forth into bright sunshine, and commenced to dance with verve and abandon." have changed how you perceived the piece to be intended by Barber?

I'm not picking on you...It is with greatest sinceriity that I, based on your willingness to respond (a willingness to which I give you full credit and respect), make my address. I'm certainly not calling you "wrong" out of hand...just extending forth some questions for general consideration.

P.S. -- I suppose I could ask one more question: Was this piece an effective choice for the makers of the movie "Platoon."? I don't recall any narration during the applicable scene. None was needed. And so much for the power of music and visual when combined in an effective manner.

Edited May 1, 2014 by HornTeacher

[charlie1223]

As a life-long musician, I would agree with some of what you are saying. However...

Sit down and listen to whatever your favorite rendition of Barber's "Adagio For Strings" might be. After listening, ask yourself the following questions:

(1) Was it descriptive of a mood or emotion which might have driven Samuel Barber to write this?

(2) Did the title "Adagio For Strings" accurately describe the moods which might have driven Barber to write this piece?

(3) Did the words "Adagio For Strings" solely prime you in experiencing the piece in a way that Barber intended, or that you intended to see it as being BEFORE you heard it?

(4) Was it impossible for you to comprehend, or try to comprehend, the message that Barber was trying to convey through his composition?

(5) If there was an accompanying narrative of "One fine day, two lovers set forth into bright sunshine, and commenced to dance with verve and abandon." have changed how you perceived to piece to be intended by Barber?

I'm not picking on you...I suppose that, based on your willingness to respond (a willingness to which I give you full credit and respect), it becomes your response of which I make my response. I'm certainly not calling you "wrong" out of hand...just extending forth some questions for general consideration.

Any rendition? Okay.

First of all, Of course music is GREAT at expressing hundreds of moods, emotions and ideas all on its own. And you do not need speech or titles to portray an emotion solely through music.

The answer all your questions at the same time. The title itself at least tells me the tempo will be slow! but it obviously doesn't tell me anything else if I had never heard the piece before. Barber was probably just gave his composition a generic title but Barber could have just been opening the floor for listeners to interpret what ever meaning they wanted from his melodies without any priming... which is kind of its own form of priming... I think regardless of what he titled the composition it would be near impossible for me to understand Barbers specific intentions with the piece, but the composition without a doubt creates a message/meaning for me whether or not it was intended by Barber. At that point it's really about the context that I create for myself, or the context given by others in their "rendition" of the piece.

On its own, maybe as a first time listener at a regular orchestra concert it could be about serenity and meditation. If I first heard this song at a 9-11 tribute/memorial service it would be more melancholy, about lost loved ones, resolve and recovery. If I watched it for the first time as a part of Cadets 2013 Side X Side I'd think more about its intellectual construction and the comparisons to other melodies in the show and itself. If I listened to an arrangement of Adagio for Strings by Tiesto it would be more about ecstasy, freedom and uplifting.

9-11 tribute

side x side

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f9KjUSDUg4w

DJ Mix starts at 1:28

I think the point here is that the meaning we get from pieces is most correlated by the context in which we here it and how much meaning/emotion we actually want to get out of it. Your last point about the accompanying narrative; it doesn't change how I perceived the piece to be intended by Barber, but I would "imagine" the melodies meaning something different to me because it invited a different context from the other contexts that I heard the piece. Heck, if I listened to this piece on my death bead it probably would invite a whole new different meaning. Narration is just 1 of many tools, like titles, context, etc. that can juxapose many different emotions and meanings on the same piece of music.

Edited May 1, 2014 by charlie1223

[HornTeacher]

Any rendition? Okay.

First of all, Of course music is GREAT at expressing hundreds of moods, emotions and ideas all on its own. And you do not need speech or titles to portray an emotion solely through music.

The answer all your questions at the same time. The title itself at least tells me the tempo will be slow! but it obviously doesn't tell me anything else if I had never heard the piece before. Barber was probably just given his composition a generic title but Barber could have just been opening the floor for listeners to interpret what ever meaning they wanted from his melodies without any priming... which is kind of its own form of priming... I think regardless of what he titled the composition it would be near impossible for me to understand Barbers specific intentions with the piece, but the composition without a doubt creates a message/meaning for me whether or not it was intended by Barber. At that point it's really about the context that I create for myself, or the context given by others in their "rendition" of the piece.

On its own, maybe as a first time listener at orchestra concert it could be about serenity and meditation, but I'd have no idea until I heard the first melodic line. If I first heard this song at a 9-11 tribute/memorial service it would be more melancholy, about lost loved ones, resolve and recovery. If I watched it for the first time as a part of Cadets 2013 Side X Side I'd think more about its intellectual construction and the comparisons to other melodies in the show and itself. If I listened to an arrangement of Adagio of Strings by Tiesto it would be something even more different then.

9-11 tribute

side x side

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f9KjUSDUg4w

DJ Mix starts at 1:28

I think the point here is that the meaning we get from pieces is most correlated by the context in which we here it and how much meaning/emotion we actually want to get out of it. Your last point about the accompanying narrative; it doesn't change how I perceived the piece to be intended by Barber, but I would "imagine" the melodies meaning something different to me because it invited a different context from the other contexts that I heard the piece. Heck, if I listened to this piece on my death bead it probably would invite a whole new different meaning. Narration is just 1 of many tools, like titles, context, etc. that can juxapose many different emotions and meanings on the same piece of music.

One heck of an assessment, Charlie. Without sounding in any way condescending -- I'm impressed. Thank you for sharing your thoughts. They give me much to ponder in respect to my own listening.

[GUARDLING]

As a life-long musician, I would agree with some of what you are saying. However...

Sit down and listen to whatever your favorite rendition of Barber's "Adagio For Strings" might be. After listening, ask yourself the following questions:

(1) Was it descriptive of a mood, emotion, or setting which might have driven Samuel Barber to write this? (In other words, was it, in fact, an "Adagio" for "Strings"?

(2) Was it crucial for you to arrive at your conclusion to point (1) without narration?

(3) Did the tone, timbre, or tempo of "Adagio For Strings" lead you to a relative understanding of the moods which might have driven Barber to write this piece?

(4) Did the words "Adagio For Strings" solely prime you in experiencing the piece in a way that Barber intended, or that you intended to see it as being BEFORE you heard it?

(5) Was it possible for you to comprehend, or try to comprehend, the mood or message that Barber was trying to convey through his composition?

(6) If there was an accompanying narrative of "One fine day, two lovers set forth into bright sunshine, and commenced to dance with verve and abandon." have changed how you perceived the piece to be intended by Barber?

I'm not picking on you...It is with greatest sinceriity that I, based on your willingness to respond (a willingness to which I give you full credit and respect), make my address. I'm certainly not calling you "wrong" out of hand...just extending forth some questions for general consideration.

P.S. -- I suppose I could ask one more question: Was this piece an effective choice for the makers of the movie "Platoon."? I don't recall any narration during the applicable scene. None was needed. And so much for the power of music and visual when combined in an effective manner.

I get what you are saying but I want to ask. Why not?

I agree narrations aren't with many very successful, I do not believe for a second that any designer believes to be successful narration needs to be added to a show. In many WGI shows I have heard voice overs of classic music including Adagio and it's worked beautifully. I myself have added voice to many shows . DCI designers may have just felt , as another poster stated, that it's just another layer. NOW, is the layer a good one? ,That's another story and maybe a personal taste, just liken when something visually is added that works or doesn't or a drum break in the middle of something that doesn't cohesively work or a corps that is doing a certain theme and throws in some pop song. Does it work or doesn't it ? Well, we can have our opinions and never doubt that they won't be there but that becomes the adjudicators job I suppose, I said it once before , sometimes a piece of music doesn't have to have the originals composers intent when re- used. Sometimes it's just a piece of music. JMO

Edited May 1, 2014 by GUARDLING

[jjeffeory]

Any rendition? Okay.

First of all, Of course music is GREAT at expressing hundreds of moods, emotions and ideas all on its own. And you do not need speech or titles to portray an emotion solely through music.

The answer all your questions at the same time. The title itself at least tells me the tempo will be slow! but it obviously doesn't tell me anything else if I had never heard the piece before. Barber was probably just gave his composition a generic title but Barber could have just been opening the floor for listeners to interpret what ever meaning they wanted from his melodies without any priming... which is kind of its own form of priming... I think regardless of what he titled the composition it would be near impossible for me to understand Barbers specific intentions with the piece, but the composition without a doubt creates a message/meaning for me whether or not it was intended by Barber. At that point it's really about the context that I create for myself, or the context given by others in their "rendition" of the piece.

On its own, maybe as a first time listener at a regular orchestra concert it could be about serenity and meditation. If I first heard this song at a 9-11 tribute/memorial service it would be more melancholy, about lost loved ones, resolve and recovery. If I watched it for the first time as a part of Cadets 2013 Side X Side I'd think more about its intellectual construction and the comparisons to other melodies in the show and itself. If I listened to an arrangement of Adagio for Strings by Tiesto it would be more about ecstasy, freedom and uplifting.

9-11 tribute

side x side

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f9KjUSDUg4w

DJ Mix starts at 1:28

I think the point here is that the meaning we get from pieces is most correlated by the context in which we here it and how much meaning/emotion we actually want to get out of it. Your last point about the accompanying narrative; it doesn't change how I perceived the piece to be intended by Barber, but I would "imagine" the melodies meaning something different to me because it invited a different context from the other contexts that I heard the piece. Heck, if I listened to this piece on my death bead it probably would invite a whole new different meaning. Narration is just 1 of many tools, like titles, context, etc. that can juxapose many different emotions and meanings on the same piece of music.

Good comments and a good sampling of Adagios to look at!

For me, it all comes down to the "how", not the "what". Groups of any flavor can do perform whatever music they choose, but at the end of the day, it's not what they perform, it's how they perform -ie how is it presented/arranged/constructed and at what level is the performance? Sometimes I can ignore the performance level, other times I can ignore how a product is presented/arranged/constructed. I can never ignore both at the same time, however... With these corps ALWAYS performing at such a high level, I am mostly left at looking at the presentation/arrangement/construction, which is where I get into trouble at times here because I don't believe that the narration adds much 99% of the time, and often detracts from the "how". So, when I hear that there is going to be narration in a show, it's an automatic negative, because that's what 99% of the shows have taught me ( in the MB world AND the DC world). The idea of even more narration is simply disheartening. lol In the color guard world, it's a completely different story and I have completely different expectations. It's a different activity where the music performance isn't so much the focus, it's the movement and the guard.

Many people just don't seem to understand that, for many of us, it is this way and that we don't feel that all the activities should necessarily become homogenized to the extent that is happening. Narration is just another tool to help homogenize the activities. IMHO.

[GUARDLING]

Good comments and a good sampling of Adagios to look at!

For me, it all comes down to the "how", not the "what". Groups of any flavor can do perform whatever music they choose, but at the end of the day, it's not what they perform, it's how they perform -ie how is it presented/arranged/constructed and at what level is the performance? Sometimes I can ignore the performance level, other times I can ignore how a product is presented/arranged/constructed. I can never ignore both at the same time, however... With these corps ALWAYS performing at such a high level, I am mostly left at looking at the presentation/arrangement/construction, which is where I get into trouble at times here because I don't believe that the narration adds much 99% of the time, and often detracts from the "how". So, when I hear that there is going to be narration in a show, it's an automatic negative, because that's what 99% of the shows have taught me ( in the MB world AND the DC world). The idea of even more narration is simply disheartening. lol In the color guard world, it's a completely different story and I have completely different expectations. It's a different activity where the music performance isn't so much the focus, it's the movement and the guard.

Many people just don't seem to understand that, for many of us, it is this way and that we don't feel that all the activities should necessarily become homogenized to the extent that is happening. Narration is just another tool to help homogenize the activities. IMHO.

See thats where many people differ in opinion. Where is the main focus.That just depends who you talk to. I think that ( focus ) has changed over the decades. Didn't Crowns drum line not place in top 5 yet win? HMMMMM and its not just where focus might have been taken away but that other areas have just as much credibility today and IMO for a few decades.

[jjeffeory]

See thats where many people differ in opinion. Where is the main focus.That just depends who you talk to. I think that ( focus ) has changed over the decades. Didn't Crowns drum line not place in top 5 yet win? HMMMMM and its not just where focus might have been taken away but that other areas have just as much credibility today and IMO for a few decades.

I agree Guardling, and this is where there are people butting heads in the marching arts world and DCI. It's probably the root cause of many of the conflicts that we have on here.

Think about it; it can be boiled down to focus, and where the focus is going versus the established expectations of the peanut gallery.

[GUARDLING]

I agree Guardling, and this is where there are people butting heads in the marching arts world and DCI. It's probably the root cause of many of the conflicts that we have on here.

Think about it; it can be boiled down to focus, and where the focus is going versus the established expectations of the peanut gallery.

agree

[BRASSO]

Think about it; it can be boiled down to focus, and where the focus is going versus the established expectations of the peanut gallery.

The peanut gallery ( aka ticket purchasers to the DCI shows ) are essentially irrelevent to whether or not narration is needed, wanted, essential to a DCI Corps show performance. The peanut gallery is a complete non factor in the judging of these shows. As such, it doesn't matter what anyone thinks on here about narration in shows... or frankly about anything at all that a Corps does in DCI. The audience does not matter in the judging, so naturally it is the 2 dozen or so current DC judges that all these DCI Corps Show Designers take their counsel from... not you ( or me, or others ) eating our peanuts up in the stands that bought a ticket.( and the peanuts )

Edited May 2, 2014 by BRASSO

[soccerguy315]

do you really think Crown believes that they need narration to win?Just asking.

well they tried without it a few times and didn't quite get there...

I believe they think the narration helped them win (aka, helped them do something they had never done before without it)

Would Crown have won without it? That's something we will never know...

I would rather hear more Crown hornline and less Crown vocals... but I acknowledge that other people might well feel differently. Maybe they buy DCI tickets to hear Crown's vocals?

Edited May 2, 2014 by soccerguy315