Creativity at the Top

[Jeff Ream]

Oh if it was just so simple. (" anyone can throw dots on a paper"... not all those dots are put on the paper the same)

We all should be able to agree that any great Show Design " if it isn't performed well, won't get credit " ( near as I can tell, nobody believes or stated otherwise ).

But let me ask you a question, ... all things are not equal.. so do you believe that its better in receiving points on the current sheets to have a great Show Design performed reasonably well, or have a reasonably good Show Design performed greatly ?

I think its preferable, given a choice , to have the former, not the latter. I see lots of dirt at Finals..even among the top 3, 4 Corps. And I think its understandable to some degree, as the demand on the marchers today, is far far greater than it ever was when I marched and taught. So it can be expected that they'd be some noticeable performance execution issues, even among the top Corps. What carries the day in the end however, increasingly, is the great Show Design. Its seems to me that even the performance execution captions are brought up with a great Show Design, even one not particularly liked by audiences. If a Corps has a subpar Show Design but executes it much better than a Corps with a great Show Design, but executed reasonably well, the current sheets will allow the judge in the booth to award the latter Corps over the former Corps... and from what I'm seeing, thats exactly what the judges are rewarding now. Phantom Regiment could perform and execute their show much better this year than the Bluecoats execute their show, but it won't matter, as the points can be more found on the current sheets that will allow a greatly designed 2014 Bluecoats show, reasonably well executed , to stay far ahead of 2014 Phantom Regiment, no matter how well executed and performed Phantom's show might be come Finals.

I don't believe that last years 6th place Bluecoats Corps had any less marcher talent overall than this year's Bluecoats Corps. I don't know this part for a fact, but my instincts tell me last year's Bluecoats Corps had similar hard working, talented marchers as this one. The difference however is the Show Design. The Bluecoats MM's, probably as talented as last years , are scoring much higher and in contention to move up in placements ( and not down from 6th ) essentially because of their Show Design, not their early season performance and execution of its MM's. Its the Show Design that is carrying the Bluecoats MM's to higher scores this year, because its a GREAT Show Design compared to others in its mix, and its performed reasonably well. Thats my assessment on why Corps like the Bluecoats move up, and why Corps with the MM overall talent of the 2012 Cavs wound up in 8th place 2 years ago.. Primarily Show Design.. not primarily the result of MM's performance execution failures of their show provided to them to perform and execute.

to answer your question, I respond with a question before I answer....are you familiar with the current sheets?

Because if you were, even on the content or repertoire side of the sheet, you'll see performance referenced. Are the performers bringing the show to life either in music and visual? Are they interpreting it? If you haven't noticed, the last few years, BD, the DCP poster child for "no demand" has been on many sheets been receiving scores at finals with book and performer either tied or performer outscoring the book.

you wont get credit for superior design without superior performance. And therein takes us back to the one fight we've seen on end on here.....is it better to design like BD, and to an extent now Crown where you show a skill enough to show you can do it ###### well, and move on to another, or is it better to run and gun for 11 minutes, but never get credit because of performance issues?

all things being equal, in 2013, BD didn't have the most demanding musical package, but they performed the hell out of it...and that's what kept them in the hunt. in several of the last few seasons, BD has either been performer equal to the book or performer over the book in several captions, and voila, they are at the top. yet Crown or Cadets or cavies, who many feel had more demand and better shows, couldn't hang on the sheets because well...they just couldn't get it clean.

up until this year, I agree that yes, design DID carry the day for many corps at the top, regardless of performance. One of the reasons for these sheets now in use was to stem that tide.it's taken 3 years, but given the wild results so far this year, and those yet to come, but now we're seeing judges actually judge the sheets in front of them, and embrace their philosophy as opposed to using the sheets but doing it how they used to. Seeing several new names judging them also helps. I also see where we have judges allowing the show of the day come to them. Look a few days ago, Bloo beat BD in drums.tonight for example, BD beat Bloo in drums. In years past, Bloo would just keep winning.

Is judging perfect? it never will be. But it will also never be able to be as black and white concrete as you want it to be.

I use these sheets in the fall judging. Even in the band circuit i'm with, it's taken a lot of work to get these sheets used properly, as well as understood by the bands.There too we still hear "demand demand demand", while we keep stressing "great now perform it". I've had one staff member tell me they should be able to get a 9 in book and a 7 in performance. I told him if that was true, i'd only be able to do it while looking at the score while judging it.

and while you may feel that about Bloo, remember...it doesn't always come down just to member talent or design. You can have talent, you can design well, but you're missing that one ever so key element...being able to teach it to make it come to life.I've been a part of great ensembles that had great design, and tons of talent....but we as teachers failed to get the kids to fully grasp it and make it truly magical.

as for Cavies 2012...design was less than previous years yes. But, even with that talent, the staff should have been able to take that talent and make design come to life better than it did...and they didn't.

Again...talent is one part of it. so is design. But so is the ability to teach that design to the talent, so it really coms through. Because in 2012, I had the chance to watch Cavies rehearse...and I gotta tell ya, I was less than impressed with how that talent was being led.

[Jeff Ream]

Ok, here's your "logic " at work. You ( and 2 or 3 others here ) believe that scores and placements are an equal measure of Show Design and MM performance execution on the current scoring sheets. Thus, to follow this logic, then the Cavs placement slide from 3rd in 2011, to 8th in 2012, is shared equally by the Cavs Show Designer(s) and the Cavs marchers.. equally. ( you can't have it any other way, or your logic collapses. )

But I simply disagree with this. I do not have the 2012 Cavs marchers sharing equally in the responsibility for the placement slide from 3rd to 8th with the 2012 Cavs adult Show Designers. I hold the 2012 Cavs adult Show Designers FAR more responsiible than you do for that placement slide from 3rd to 8th. We just disagree on this... no problem. You assign much more of the MM responsibility for the placement slide from 3rd to 8th than I do. I think the 2012 Cavs MM's had no shot at all of staying in the top 3 or 4 in 2012 with that dud of a Show Design creation. You think they had that chance, if they executed and performed better. I think you are misguided in that. The Cavs of 2012, as talented as they were in 2012, never had a fighting chance at all not to have suffered placement slide with that dud of a 2012 Show Design, even if they practiced until they all dropped, and performed and executed the snoot out of it at Finals.

let me ask you a simple question, and I'm not asking as a way to make fun of you or bash you:

when's the last time you judged? what training have you had for judging?

[BRASSO]

Absolutely true that the players are given the show to perform. Are you modifying what you call 'show design' from your earlier description? That the complexity and content of the book is included? i

I havn't t altered a thing in my remarks above.. nor was there a need to, imo. I see nothing at all in your remarks that is in conflict with any of my remarks above, as none of your replies to me ever addressed my central remarks at all here, near as I can tell from reading your reply, anyway.. It appears to me from reading your reply that you assign equal weight on the current sheets to both the Show Design and MM performance execution. As such, we'll conclude that you believe that the Cavs placement slide from 2011 to 2012 from 3rd to 8th is likwise shared equally between the Cavs marchers of 2012 and the Cavs Show Designers of 2012. Thats fine and all, but as mentioned above, I don't share this view that the Cavs marchers share equal responsibility for their placement slide in 2012. I put the bulk of that responsibility squarely on the shoulders of the adults that created that dud of a Show Design that year. The Cavs MM's were captives of that Show Design dud, and no amount of performance execution by the MM's was going to head that off. You disagree with this, of course. And you are entitled to that disagreement and your assessment of the supposed equal value of MM performance execution and Show Design on the current sheets. I can see I have been unsuccessful in convincing you of the folly of your assessments on the increased effects of the Show Design over that of performance execution with the current sheets, but I'm pretty sure you know that your assessments of the current MM performance execution having, in your view, equal weight as the Show Design on the current sheets is not something I consider accurate , nor credible at all.. I see no evidence to support this alleged position of equal weight on the sheets between perforrmance execution and Show Design influences. I see far more weight given to Show Design construction by the current DCI Judges, under the system provided to them to utilize, than to MM performance execution of that Show Design provided to the MM's. So we'll just agree to disagree on this, and simply move on.

Edited July 12, 2014 by BRASSO

[MikeD]

I havn't t altered a thing in my remarks above.. nor was there a need to, imo. I see nothing at all in your remarks that is in conflict with any of my remarks above, as none of your replies to me ever addressed my central remarks at all here, near as I can tell from reading your reply, anyway.. It appears to me from reading your reply that you assign equal weight on the current sheets to both the Show Design and MM performance execution. As such, we'll conclude that you believe that the Cavs placement slide from 2011 to 2012 from 3rd to 8th is likwise shared equally between the Cavs marchers of 2012 and the Cavs Show Designers of 2012. Thats fine and all, but as mentioned above, I don't share this view that the Cavs marchers share equal responsibility for their placement slide in 2012. I put the bulk of that responsibility squarely on the shoulders of the adults that created that dud of a Show Design that year. The Cavs MM's were captives of that Show Design dud, and no amount of performance execution by the MM's was going to head that off. You disagree with this, of course. And you are entitled to that disagreement and your assessment of the supposed equal value of MM performance execution and Show Design on the current sheets. I can see I have been unsuccessful in convincing you of the folly of your assessments on the increased effects of the Show Design over that of performance execution with the current sheets, but I'm pretty sure you know that your assessments of the current MM performance execution having, in your view, equal weight as the Show Design on the current sheets is not something I consider accurate , nor credible at all.. I see no evidence to support this alleged position of equal weight on the sheets between perforrmance execution and Show Design influences. I see far more weight given to Show Design construction by the current DCI Judges, under the system provided to them to utilize, than to MM performance execution of that Show Design provided to the MM's. So we'll just agree to disagree on this, and simply move on.

Having MM of equal ability between years does not in and of itself guarantee equal performance levels either, and it is not just the written show the members are given. The staff also has to have the skills and plan to rehearse the members so that they maximize their performance level.

As has been stated...everything has to be top-notch for the various corps to reach the top level. IMO you assign far too much weight to one single aspect of the show. We move on.

[jordsterr]

After reading all these posts, some questions come to mind. Some of these are rhetorical.

How often is "too often" for any source material?

Can even "overused" source materia be utilizized in new ways?

Are Cadets and SCV merely rehashing old shows, or are they exploring new ideas?

Is it possible that Rimsky-Korsakov and Copland might be better "suppliers of source music" than some other composers represented? In this question, I don't refer to the arranger.

What is the most utilized piece of source music, and when was it last utilized?

Who is doing something unique this year? What elements make it unique? Are those elements new? Is anyone else using those elements albeit in some different way?

Even given changes in judge sheets over many years, is the relationship of design to execution that different over time? Does the Cadets placement in 1986 have any relation to the design team change that year? And the next?

I'm not offering opinions at ths point, but I'm interested as to if people can quantify their opinions or if most if us have subjective opinions based on external values, ie. I want my corps to win, therefore their show is better.

[jordsterr]

One more question. Did Phantom take lots of criticism for "rehashing" Spartacus? Again...somewhat rhetorical considering source material.

[BRASSO]

One more question. Did Phantom take lots of criticism for "rehashing" Spartacus?

Not from those that that get paid to give their opinions..... the DCI judges.

Edited July 12, 2014 by BRASSO

[jordsterr]

Not from those that that get paid to give their opinions..... the DCI judges.

Good point. But none of my questions go those people. After all, their opinions seem to be totally irrelevant to the opinions on this page.

Edited July 12, 2014 by jordsterr

[jordsterr]

Here's one more question.

If the Bluecoats end up 4th this year, one place above last year, will this show continue to be deemed as ground breaking? Why or why not?

[BRASSO]

Which of your 15 questions you posed for us here are rhetorical in nature ( and thus, in no need of a response reply), and which of the 15 questions here are you actually seeking a response reply from us ?