Jeff Ream Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 can you explain what you mean here so i can understand why you question the spreads. i wasn't there so you can help. 18.2 to 17.0 from first to second, then down to 16.4 then 16.2. looking at value of a tenth, which you use the sub box numbers for, the closest sub box was 6 tenths. that's "definitive differences" as opposed to comparable or minor differences. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donincardona Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 18.2 to 17.0 from first to second, then down to 16.4 then 16.2. looking at value of a tenth, which you use the sub box numbers for, the closest sub box was 6 tenths. that's "definitive differences" as opposed to comparable or minor differences. got it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onthe50 Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 I guess we can agree to disagree. According to the DCA rulebook: The judge is to recognize and reward the quality of content with respect to brass and percussion, and the achievement of excellence by the ensemble. Emphasis is to be placed on the responsibilities creating variety, risk, intrigue. Achievement is defined as the simultaneous consideration of what is being done and how well it is done. The value of the composition development and skillfulness of the ensemble excellence are credited as they contribute to a diverse, active, inspiring, thought provoking, and unique production that demonstrates competence in training and expertise. Ticks went out in the 80's. If you choose to sit in the stands with your tick clickers and think that this is how ME is evaluated then I hope this post helps. When considering the definition of ME, I just think its crazy to consider the Bucs closer to Bush than C2 and according to the spreads "not comparable" to Fusion in Compositional Development in this caption. Really? I realize the performance flaws will affect the Clarity & Excellence sub-caption but you need to consider the entire sheet not just a bullet or two in one sub-caption. Not trying to be confrontational, I just don't think some people on this board are properly informed. BTW, it was great to see CV this early. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyDCyanks Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 (edited) I guess we can agree to disagree. According to the DCA rulebook: The judge is to recognize and reward the quality of content with respect to brass and percussion, and the achievement of excellence by the ensemble. Emphasis is to be placed on the responsibilities creating variety, risk, intrigue. Achievement is defined as the simultaneous consideration of what is being done and how well it is done. The value of the composition development and skillfulness of the ensemble excellence are credited as they contribute to a diverse, active, inspiring, thought provoking, and unique production that demonstrates competence in training and expertise. Ticks went out in the 80's. If you choose to sit in the stands with your tick clickers and think that this is how ME is evaluated then I hope this post helps. When considering the definition of ME, I just think its crazy to consider the Bucs closer to Bush than C2 and according to the spreads "not comparable" to Fusion in Compositional Development in this caption. Really? I realize the performance flaws will affect the Clarity & Excellence sub-caption but you need to consider the entire sheet not just a bullet or two in one sub-caption. Not trying to be confrontational, I just don't think some people on this board are properly informed. BTW, it was great to see CV this early. So what you are saying is be ###### with creating a program you can achieve lets just design a program that is an automatic 100 in the composition sub box.... Thats not the way it works because then the corps with the most difficult perceived book would start the season with 100.. How it is actually implemented is you are credited with the design relative to how its being achieved. And on Saturday night Bucs were the 5th best corps in ME. edit: I also noticed you didn't bold any of the words like achievement or excellence. Edited July 16, 2014 by JerseyDCyanks 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamarag Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 I guess we can agree to disagree. According to the DCA rulebook: The judge is to recognize and reward the quality of content with respect to brass and percussion, and the achievement of excellence by the ensemble. Emphasis is to be placed on the responsibilities creating variety, risk, intrigue. Achievement is defined as the simultaneous consideration of what is being done and how well it is done. The value of the composition development and skillfulness of the ensemble excellence are credited as they contribute to a diverse, active, inspiring, thought provoking, and unique production that demonstrates competence in training and expertise. Ticks went out in the 80's. If you choose to sit in the stands with your tick clickers and think that this is how ME is evaluated then I hope this post helps. When considering the definition of ME, I just think its crazy to consider the Bucs closer to Bush than C2 and according to the spreads "not comparable" to Fusion in Compositional Development in this caption. Really? I realize the performance flaws will affect the Clarity & Excellence sub-caption but you need to consider the entire sheet not just a bullet or two in one sub-caption. Not trying to be confrontational, I just don't think some people on this board are properly informed. What you need to understand is that only content that is achieved can be given credit. It doesn't matter what you do, if it's not properly achieved. I'll agree that Bucs and C2 are *designed* on similar levels when it comes to Music Ensemble, but there's absolutely no question that C2 *achieved* at a much higher level on Saturday night, hence the spread. As I talked about in my previous post, excellence can drive composition, and this is very true in Bucs' case where the content cannot be credited without the performance. Which, as I said, will no doubt happen sooner rather than later. Trust me when I tell you that the people posting extensively on this topic are not only very informed, they are extremely knowledgeable and experience on the topic of judging in general and music ensemble in particular. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajlisko Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 I guess we can agree to disagree. According to the DCA rulebook: The judge is to recognize and reward the quality of content with respect to brass and percussion, and the achievement of excellence by the ensemble. Emphasis is to be placed on the responsibilities creating variety, risk, intrigue. Achievement is defined as the simultaneous consideration of what is being done and how well it is done. The value of the composition development and skillfulness of the ensemble excellence are credited as they contribute to a diverse, active, inspiring, thought provoking, and unique production that demonstrates competence in training and expertise. Ticks went out in the 80's. If you choose to sit in the stands with your tick clickers and think that this is how ME is evaluated then I hope this post helps. When considering the definition of ME, I just think its crazy to consider the Bucs closer to Bush than C2 and according to the spreads "not comparable" to Fusion in Compositional Development in this caption. Really? I realize the performance flaws will affect the Clarity & Excellence sub-caption but you need to consider the entire sheet not just a bullet or two in one sub-caption. Not trying to be confrontational, I just don't think some people on this board are properly informed. BTW, it was great to see CV this early. So ... interesting defense ... I don't know you nor the indivuduals you're responding to ... I find it interesting that you did not highlight "achievement" as cited in the DCA rulebook ... IMO, from reading what was stated up to your response, it was the "achivement" that was lacking in fulfilling the "content" that was written into the show ... if I am wrong, please forgive me ... only the original commentators can ... well ... comment on "what" they were (for lack of better words) commenting on ... :-) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasgroh Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 Another thing that does not help the Bucs at all is the staging. With the front ensemble being staged on the field, the brass is confined to the rear half of the field and are never really in your face until the end after they "break on through". The whole show, you are thinking....what's going on....where is the volume? Then they give it to you at the end. It's just a shame that they can't give it to you for more of the show. I'm pretty sure you can't fix that at this point of the season. ...I was on the track and fully sensed the lack of impact from Reading's brass. AND percussion. Of course the staging of the pit is the issue. Funny, I don't think the fix is that difficult. Dunno for sure, but there is an area (10 ft?) where the corps proper can breach the front sideline, so move the pit and the whole dam drill forward 8 steps or so, that would put the pit about 4 steps back from the sideline and, with a few tweaks, allow enough room to perform the show as (almost) written, but 5 yards closer to the audience. Heh...'course I'm just a marching-geek pixel-pusher so take it for what it's worth...truth be told after shooting any given group I can't really tell, short of bad tears or something like that, how a corps is performing, as a whole. ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lovindrumcorps Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 18.2 to 17.0 from first to second, then down to 16.4 then 16.2. looking at value of a tenth, which you use the sub box numbers for, the closest sub box was 6 tenths. that's "definitive differences" as opposed to comparable or minor differences. That too is somewhat confusing. Not your explanation. Makes sense. However, the percussion judge and ME judge clearly weren't at the same show. I was at the show as well just left of center field, about 5 rows from the bottom. I heard the same tears. How does this earn Reading an 18.2 in percussion? They clearly weren't achieving at a high level when they have difficulties playing within the ensemble. And an 18.2 is a number more characteristic of a mid-august number. While Cabs are well above the curve this season. I don't think ANYONE would be deserved of such a number in mid-July. I'm no adjudicator by any means, but this seems more like a single adjudicator trying to determine the outcome of the show. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamarag Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 That too is somewhat confusing. Not your explanation. Makes sense. However, the percussion judge and ME judge clearly weren't at the same show. I was at the show as well just left of center field, about 5 rows from the bottom. I heard the same tears. How does this earn Reading an 18.2 in percussion? They clearly weren't achieving at a high level when they have difficulties playing within the ensemble. And an 18.2 is a number more characteristic of a mid-august number. While Cabs are well above the curve this season. I don't think ANYONE would be deserved of such a number in mid-July. I'm no adjudicator by any means, but this seems more like a single adjudicator trying to determine the outcome of the show. Well, in addition to being two separate captions with very different criteria, the biggest reason for what you've observed is quite simple. The percussion judge is on the field, while the music ensemble judge is in the box. The percussion judge on the field cannot discuss anything ensemble related, which includes balance and ensemble timing. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyDCyanks Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 That too is somewhat confusing. Not your explanation. Makes sense. However, the percussion judge and ME judge clearly weren't at the same show. I was at the show as well just left of center field, about 5 rows from the bottom. I heard the same tears. How does this earn Reading an 18.2 in percussion? They clearly weren't achieving at a high level when they have difficulties playing within the ensemble. And an 18.2 is a number more characteristic of a mid-august number. While Cabs are well above the curve this season. I don't think ANYONE would be deserved of such a number in mid-July. I'm no adjudicator by any means, but this seems more like a single adjudicator trying to determine the outcome of the show. I don't think the ME problems really have that much to do with the percussion score. It is extremely difficult to hear ensemble issues when your on the field focusing on a single section. Thats why there used to be an ensemble percussion guy in the stands. However, it is crazy to believe that from the field Bucs were 2pts better than Cabs and 1.2pts better than C2. Whats more interesting is that the percussion judge popped that mid-august number with 2 corps still to perform.. So if CV and Cabs were both better you would have had a corps scoring in the top of the percussion box on july 12th!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.