Front Ensemble Choreography

[Kamarag]

In effect, visual difficulty in playing technique is irrelevant and should not be part of the judging criteria.

Simultaneous responsibility absolutely should be (and is) judged. Wow, you're talking about a paradigm shift in judging if you take that away.

[LabMaster]

I would say neither. And before I even get to that, I would caution you not to be too fixated on facial expressions. Yes, the Boston synth player was one particularly egregious example of front ensemble emoting gone wrong - it was a gross spectacle that distracted from the performance, it was clearly not genuine (as, over the course of the season, the outlandish-ness of the performance grew as she was swept up in the media attention), and it wasn't conceived with the aim of improving the ensemble's performance.

That said, facial expressions on their own aren't a large part of what front ensemble's think about when they discuss "emoting." Generally, when front ensembles discuss their movements, they're looking at the size of their pulsing and the sharpness and timing of their gestures (i.e. - is this a hard mallets up, is this a soft release or a harsh release, etc.). When facial expressions do come into the mix, they are - when performed genuinely - usually aimed at the other members of the front ensemble.

I elaborated on this at length in my original post, but to reiterate: It is emotionally and mentally draining to put yourself in the emotional context of the music that you're performing when you play that music as often as drum corps kids do. To be legitimately sad about sad music is hard when you've performed that sad music a thousand times in the last week. The emoting helps counteract that. It enables the students to look up and down the line and see people engaged in the emotional dialogue of the show, which (in theory) is supposed to make it easier for them to tap into that. In other words - "Johnny looks sad while he's playing so that helps me feel sad here, too."

The gestures have to be big because the front ensemble communicates over a large distance. If I'm the front row vibraphone on Side 1, and I'm communicating with the front row vibraphone on Side 2 who has my part, there could be 20 or 30 yards of distance between us. The gestures have to be big in order to translate, and they have to be big in order to be effective in achieving the purpose I outlined above.

Professional classical musicians don't move much? Since when? If you're referring to a large string section playing in a symphony orchestra, then care is definitely taken to make bowings uniform across the section. That's done in part to achieve consistency in tone quality and articulation, but it's absolutely also done for visual effect. But that aside, you've got the wrong genre:

The front ensemble is not a symphony orchestra. They are a chamber ensemble. And chamber ensembles move.

Chamber groups move to indicate time. They move to indicate mood. They move to indicate breath, and they move to indicate intent. All of that complex dialogue happens through motion. And when the size of the ensemble gets too large for everyone to be moving, they bring in a conductor whose baton is meant to communicate all of that information from a single authority.

The bottom line is that good front ensembles don't move for the audience or the judges. They move, just as they perform, for each other. Understanding that is key to understanding why they emote the way that they do.

P.S. - I don't want to derail this thread, so perhaps we should start another one on this topic. BUT, in regards to amplification: There isn't a front ensemble in DCI this year that would be heard over their brass line without amplification; and even if you just set up a front ensemble on the sideline, the only thing you would hear from the Lucas Oil Stadium press box would be the cymbals, the concert bass drums, and the xylophone. All of the gorgeous, lyrical writing in the SCV pit this year? It would disappear. And you can forget about playing anything in the bottom three octaves of your marimbas - none of that would carry without amplification. And it's not because the kids today don't play loud enough; it's because rosewood bars simply aren't capable of projecting that loudly without engaging in a technique that destroys the instruments and does permanent, long term damage to the performer's hands. Amplification enables the front ensemble to be an equal contributor to the music component of the show. Don't like that kind of writing and show design? That's fine, then we obviously have a difference in taste. But none of the great shows of the last decade would be possible without the contributions of an amplified pit.

Cognitive studies absolutely show that when gestures are attached to musical sounds, they can affect the listener's perception of the sound even when that sound doesn't change. In one study, the sound of a timpanist (I think it was a timpanist?) striking a drum was played over two videos of a timpanist striking a drum. In the first video, the timpanist uses a sharp gesture to strike the drum, and in the second he uses a flowing gesture. The study participants rated the second note as being "longer in length" than the first, even though the recording was the same. Examples like that abound in the music cognition world of gestures impacting what we think we hear. So yes, the motions do impact the audible aspect of the performance.

I take exception to the characterization you have put forth, rather harshly of the Boston synth player. Maybe a bit overdone but equally overdone is your critique of her. I am sure if you look at many other corps you will find many other similar examples. It is just that she got picked up and was entered into a social media whirlwind. which by the way was not a bad thing for DCI. I am sure she got a lot more visibility than any other previous DCI exposure. You then declared her to be : "a particularly egregious example", "a gross spectacle", "a distraction", "outlandish", "not genuine" and "swept up in media attention". You further offer that FE's discuss their movements, size of their pulsing, sharpness and timing of their gestures. which to me would come across as not genuine. But you seem OK with that, going so far to point out that facial expressions are OK when they are genuine and aimed at other members of the FE. which again to me, seems not genuine when they are "aiming" their expressions.

I agree with much of what you said about emoting and it is not limited to FE's. I see the huge beaming cheerleader type smiles by guard members throughout entire performances. I see snares with harda## scowls to show how intense they are. I watched a top 8 corps, past Champion going through run throughs prior to Nationals, not cleaning, or fixing anything. They were doing emoting run throughs. stopping only for the staff to comment on how much they were emoting to the box. I actually heard shouted down to the field fro a staffer "you are all not emoting enough". "I need more emoting, show your faces up here, emote more". I am sure much of what we see, the pulsing and whatnot can be controlled but that should be completely stifled. MM's these days are asked to play roles, to be characters in a theatrical production.

I'll stop rambling here, but my point is/was that IMO there was a bit of unnecessary harshness directed at the Boston synth player. and I don't think that type of "egregious " display is limited only to her.

[Liahona]

I would say neither. And before I even get to that, I would caution you not to be too fixated on facial expressions. Yes, the Boston synth player was one particularly egregious example of front ensemble emoting gone wrong - it was a gross spectacle that distracted from the performance, it was clearly not genuine (as, over the course of the season, the outlandish-ness of the performance grew as she was swept up in the media attention), and it wasn't conceived with the aim of improving the ensemble's performance.

Really? This is the first I've heard that...you are right...yep...it was the worse thing that has ever happened to DCI...24 million views...102 thousand likes...195 thousand shares and 86 thousand comments...yep totally egregious...

[Phan_of_Drumming]

Really? This is the first I've heard that...you are right...yep...it was the worse thing that has ever happened to DCI...24 million views...102 thousand likes...195 thousand shares and 86 thousand comments...yep totally egregious...

I see where you're coming from, but I don't subscribe to the view that all publicity is good publicity. In my opinion, her performance was a caricature of all the negative stereotypes associated with the front ensemble realm of the activity. It was hardly the worst thing in the world, and I rather enjoyed Boston's show and their front ensemble this year. But that philosophy towards performance isn't one that I agree with or that I would teach my students.

If we want to continue this discussion via private message, I'm happy to. But I don't think this conversation is productive for this thread.

Edited August 31, 2016 by Phan_of_Drumming

[garfield]

I see where you're coming from, but I don't subscribe to the view that all publicity is good publicity. In my opinion, her performance was a caricature of all the negative stereotypes associated with the front ensemble realm of the activity. It was hardly the worst thing in the world, and I rather enjoyed Boston's show and their front ensemble this year. But that philosophy towards performance isn't one that I agree with or that I would teach my students.

If we want to continue this discussion via private message, I'm happy to. But I don't think this conversation is productive for this thread.

As much as I enjoyed seeing her video run in the Daily Mail (London) online, I can't exactly disagree with your contention.

[George Dixon]

Yes, The Boston Crusader's "possessed" keyboard artist certainly caused a media frenzy, and deservidedly so this summer. Can't say I've heard of a "pit choreographer," but I'd say the "Design Team" plays a role in it. For the past three years THE ACADEMY's front ensemble has certainly elevated the creative expression of its performers that has not only garnered entusiastic response but scored good GE points in the process. This years "Xylo-bones" skeleton characters featured in its "Drum Corpse Bride" program is a prime example of this in action.

"Xylobones" !!!!!!! Hahahahaha :)

[garfield]

Simultaneous responsibility absolutely should be (and is) judged. Wow, you're talking about a paradigm shift in judging if you take that away.

I agree, but a significant component of the activity apparently thinks simultaneous demand should be limited to body motion and emoting while playing relatively easy books of music because, after all, "...if it can't be heard from the box it's not adding to the performance, is it? So why is it judged?"

[LabMaster]

I see where you're coming from, but I don't subscribe to the view that all publicity is good publicity. In my opinion, her performance was a caricature of all the negative stereotypes associated with the front ensemble realm of the activity. It was hardly the worst thing in the world, and I rather enjoyed Boston's show and their front ensemble this year. But that philosophy towards performance isn't one that I agree with or that I would teach my students.

If we want to continue this discussion via private message, I'm happy to. But I don't think this conversation is productive for this thread.

I suppose that could be construed as a pompous POV. Or so it seems. Imploring my entire corps to emote, isn't a philosophy I would agree with or teach, on that we are aligned.

[Cappybara]

I take exception to the characterization you have put forth, rather harshly of the Boston synth player. Maybe a bit overdone but equally overdone is your critique of her. I am sure if you look at many other corps you will find many other similar examples. It is just that she got picked up and was entered into a social media whirlwind. which by the way was not a bad thing for DCI. I am sure she got a lot more visibility than any other previous DCI exposure. You then declared her to be : "a particularly egregious example", "a gross spectacle", "a distraction", "outlandish", "not genuine" and "swept up in media attention". You further offer that FE's discuss their movements, size of their pulsing, sharpness and timing of their gestures. which to me would come across as not genuine. But you seem OK with that, going so far to point out that facial expressions are OK when they are genuine and aimed at other members of the FE. which again to me, seems not genuine when they are "aiming" their expressions.

I agree with much of what you said about emoting and it is not limited to FE's. I see the huge beaming cheerleader type smiles by guard members throughout entire performances. I see snares with harda## scowls to show how intense they are. I watched a top 8 corps, past Champion going through run throughs prior to Nationals, not cleaning, or fixing anything. They were doing emoting run throughs. stopping only for the staff to comment on how much they were emoting to the box. I actually heard shouted down to the field fro a staffer "you are all not emoting enough". "I need more emoting, show your faces up here, emote more". I am sure much of what we see, the pulsing and whatnot can be controlled but that should be completely stifled. MM's these days are asked to play roles, to be characters in a theatrical production.

I'll stop rambling here, but my point is/was that IMO there was a bit of unnecessary harshness directed at the Boston synth player. and I don't think that type of "egregious " display is limited only to her.

Honestly, I agree with Phan. Her display was pretty distracting and over the top. Kind of shameful that she was allowed to continue imo. I watched the show live this year and I was definitely not the only one having a hard time concentrating on the actual corps

[KVG_DC]

"Xylobones" !!!!!!! Hahahahaha :)

I'm glad that's catching on.