Communication, whats it all about?

[John Mayer]

Maybe the comm judge is posted down front and just looks at the crowd, and makes their assessment of this caption based on only crowd response, crowd interaction, crowd enjoyment.

Then call the caption based on what it should really be, which is money.

Get people entertained so they tell their friends "holy carp! You missed a great show" instead of what happens alot of times, which is, "show was OK, corps were good, but not very entertaining"

How many times are you going to go see a band at a rock concert when your just not very entertained by the band and or the whole event?

[Gary Matczak]

I thoughts the communications caption rated corps for how well they communicated the concept of their show on social media,..................?

[totaleefree]

_{I think it has to do with how well the Narrator explains the concept of what the Corps is doing to the crowd ( maybe only in DCI)}

[bill]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnO9Jyz82Ps

[Gary Matczak]

..........we have that narration thing now too...................tho govies have kinda done it without speakers and amps for some time now,.........the dude does have pipes that carries without the need of a bull horn or scoop bass bins,..........

[Kamarag]

Maybe the comm judge is posted down front and just looks at the crowd, and makes their assessment of this caption based on only crowd response, crowd interaction, crowd enjoyment.

Then call the caption based on what it should really be, which is money.

Get people entertained so they tell their friends "holy carp! You missed a great show" instead of what happens alot of times, which is, "show was OK, corps were good, but not very entertaining"

How many times are you going to go see a band at a rock concert when your just not very entertained by the band and or the whole event?

The problem is, you end up rewarding only a certain type of show, which will lead to everyone doing that type of show, which will lead to complete and utter sameness and boredom. I mean, let's use the Govies example. They have a certain style that works for them. The crowds like it. Sometimes it wins. But do we want every Class A corps to copy that style? Hell no. If they did, we wouldn't have had last year's incredibly sophisticated White Sabers show.

Right now DCA has an incredibly diverse number of corps and styles, and that's fantastic. The day we have ten Caballeros copycats or ten Buccaneers copycats in finals is the day I stop bothering to follow the circuit. Yes, you can have many different kinds of "in your face" entertaining corps, but what about the corps that designs, performs, and executes more subtle material? If they engage the audience just as well, shouldn't they be rewarded? And we haven't even factored geography into the mix...

If you want to give an award to the corps that peaks the most decibels on an applause meter, I'm all for it. But that shouldn't decide who wins or loses.

That said, I do think DCA and the judging community could do a better job explaining the criteria and philosophy of the entire system, not just whatever "communication" is.

[BigW]

Glad to know we never "pushed" the Bucs even when we beat them

Well, you never had a chance to push them in the regular season. Way behind at Bucknell. You showed up at finals, dove straight for the finish line and never made contact.

[Jeff Ream]

I asked around on this to people who do know and this is the impression I got from the responses:

The main thrust of the communication number is whether you find yourself immersed in a program. Do you want to see more? Do you want to see what happens next? Is the corps breaking the fourth wall and reaching through to you? Do you find it exciting or engaging, or are you thinking about getting a Taco-in-the-bag from concessions along with a Kit-Kat when this corps is finished? That's the essence of the Communication numbers. I find from cursory glaces at recaps that they don't usually vary much beyond the mean of the actual GE score in practice, though. It would be very hard to justify giving a team, say, a 93/91 Effect number and then giving them an 89 in communication. If I were on the staff, I'd want to know why so I can fix that issue. It would be a clear indication something was intrinsically wrong.

Now the opposite... the message there would probably be that perhaps the show is very simplistic, but it's a really fun show to get into regardless.

Usually, if you get something like a 93/91 in Effect, you usually see a 92 Communication number, sometimes a 93, rarely a 91, and usually never anything skewed out of the range. If you can find an example, please let me know, it would make me very curious.

As for crowd response, yeah, it's part of the brew, but not the main thrust. With an audience you do have to take certain issues into account. Is it a general, throughout the crowd reaction or just the groupies of a given team for instance? You can tell the difference. The best crowd response I've heard this season was when Frank Ponzo cut loose at Wayne and the crowd spontaneously went "WHOOOA!!!!" at least twice. I even leaned back when i got caught off-guard.. You bet things like that that get noticed.

On that subject, I find it amusing that I think I reacted more for Bluecoats at Chester than a Bloo parent sitting behind me. No names.

here's my question since the rollout of this was nebulous and remains so:

everything you talk about was part of pretty much any GE sheet ever created, including the DCA sheets. So why the need to have this be a separate sheet? is it because they ran out of points to make 100 from when they eliminated field visual ( which IMO is sorely needed, because serious visual dirt is ignored)

[Jeff Ream]

Maybe the comm judge is posted down front and just looks at the crowd, and makes their assessment of this caption based on only crowd response, crowd interaction, crowd enjoyment.

Then call the caption based on what it should really be, which is money.

Get people entertained so they tell their friends "holy carp! You missed a great show" instead of what happens alot of times, which is, "show was OK, corps were good, but not very entertaining"

How many times are you going to go see a band at a rock concert when your just not very entertained by the band and or the whole event?

it's the same people that judge the effect captions

[BigW]

here's my question since the rollout of this was nebulous and remains so:

everything you talk about was part of pretty much any GE sheet ever created, including the DCA sheets. So why the need to have this be a separate sheet? is it because they ran out of points to make 100 from when they eliminated field visual ( which IMO is sorely needed, because serious visual dirt is ignored)

I wish I had an answer to the question, Jeff, and wish I'd have asked that to the people who talked to me about it.. The best thought on it I can give you because I wasn't privy to the whole thing is that it frankly gives more weight to effect, that's what everyone wanted, and it was a vehicle to do so that everyone liked.

John's previous comment about the fact Effect can cover more then "BAM! POW! ZOWIEEEE!" is also salient. Can I 'communicate' to people in other ways than taking a 2 by 4 and smacking them with it? Maybe, tickle them with a feather? Give them a hug? Doing something silly to make them smile and laugh? Give someone a big sloppy kiss!? (God help them if I did that!) I certainly hope I can. The early 90's Bushwackers really worked hard to get people to think on a far deeper level about that issue and idea in DCA, and I think for the better.

"Variety" is usually a buzz word on most effect sheets for a reason.