Jump to content

SCV's show was an epic musical fail.


Recommended Posts

It's great that you're able to systematize and articulate your point of view, but keep in mind that whichever qualities you've decided constitute objective quality, those qualities were decided by you (subjectively) and then evaluated by you (also subjectively).  Know your limitations.

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not going to take the time to respond to the content of your post, because frankly it's subjective, however let me point out a few fallacies that you've committed:

I have a BM degree from Juilliardwhich doesn't make me more knowledgeable than anyone else—it simply certifies that I'm very knowledgeable about music—and what distinguishes good music from bad music. - False. A Bachelors degree means you have a basic overarching understanding of music. As someone with multiple advanced degrees in music I can tell you that you don't actually dig into the deeper questions in music until you get further along in your education. Maybe you should consider going back to school if you would like a more robust understanding of music. 

But nobody would argue that the music has a far greater impact on a show's general effect than either drill or choreography. And drill and choreography don't even come close to having the emotional impact of music.- That's your opinion. Some would argue it's to cohesiveness of the audio and visual that makes drum corps compelling. 

It left me cold and feeling completely flat. - Cool story, others (myself included) would agree. 

There were no discernable, memorable melodies in the show—So? It's 2018. Melodies have been out of fashion for several decades in contemporary music. Get with the times. 

There was no sense of a grounded tempo anywhere in the show—Again, so? Following themes in contemporary music, consistent tempos (or time signatures/tempos/coordinated events in general) have been on the way out for a while. Composers that can create cohesive threads that hold pieces together without using a gridded pulse are praised. 

NOTE: Even some of the most brilliant, avante-garde compositions in music history hold to a steady tempo for at least 16-32 bars—I'm thinking of pieces like Stravinsky's Le Sacre du Printemps or Bartok's Concerto for Orchestra orJohn Cage's Third Construction. It's time to update your definition of avante-garde man. Even the Cage is 80 years old at this point. 

And I get music by Steve Reich, Igor Stravinsky, Vincent Persichetti, John Cage, and countless other "challenging" composers. Seriously, you're looking very silly right now. Do you actually consider these composers 'challenging?' IT'S 2018, NONE OF THESE COMPOSERS CAN BE CONSIDERED CONTEMPORARY OR AVANTE-GARDE AT THIS POINT. Maybe if you had continued your education past a B.M. you would be more up to date with current trends in contemporary music. 

Some of you will think I'm just an old fart who doesn't understand current music. At this I just shake my head and laugh: have you noticed that people still love The Beatles, Beethoven, Mississippi John Hurt, and Joni Mitchell? This music isn't any less relevant and popular today than it was 25 or 100 years ago. - Oh really? You sure about that?

When it comes to music, you can't get rid of the fundamental elements that make music great without destroying it: - Yes you can, it's called innovation and experimentation, and it's what composers have been doing for the last century. The elimination of tempo, pitch even-tempered tuning systems, time, form, and space; the eschewing of traditional instruments, the creation of purely electronic genres (both popular and academic), the creation of purely graphical scores that require interpretation and improvisation, are all strategies that compsoers and artists have employed that fundamentally change the way music is created and experienced, and evolve the art-form beyond common practice structure. 

1. It moves you emotionally on the FIRST listen.
2. It is memorable—you can actually hum or sing some of it after one hearing—and ALL of it after several hearings.
3. It has a steady, consistent pulse that you can slip into and feel—in a sustained way—while you listen.

Your narrow definition of what constitutes musical expression is limited and fallacious. It ignores 100 years of experimentation and creation by a plethora of composers and the achievements that have been made in Spectralism, Flux, Electroacoustics and Acousmatics, Microtonality, Improvisation, Mixed Media, Non-Syntactical Vocal Music, New Complexity, and countless other sub-genres and movements. You are more than welcome to your option, but this diatribe that tries to leverage your supposed experience in music is ignorant and insulting to those who have spent their lives researching and creating new modes of musical expression. 

Take your Bachelor's degree and hit the road man. 

Edited by MarimbaManiac
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 7
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A more concise version of the OP can be found in the essay about poetry at the beginning of the book the teacher has the student read to the class in Dead Poet Society.  

I concur with the teacher's one word summation of that essay, and the subsequent disposition of the medium on which it was printed.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, GUARDLING said:

Well this didn't take long...lol

I would characterize this as "click-bait"

There is the Bold title, and "epic fail" descriptor.

There is a list of accolades that qualifies his musical knowledge. All of it is a little bombastic when it just comes down to a simple opinion, and we know what they say about those...don't we? 

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SWriverstone said:

But the emotional underpinnings of any show are the music.

Disagree.  Some people's emotions are much more tuned into what is happening visually in a show.  There is a reason DCI awards the same amount of points (GE and otherwise) to Visual as Music. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for your opinion, and for introducing me to the mere-exposure effect.

Not sure if I agree completely with your definition of what great music is, and I’m in the minority of not being particularly drawn in or moved by SCV’s show this year (although I did really like the part of the closer where they are pushing the platforms toward each other). I’ll have to think on your premises more. 

However, the show has moved many others and it was performed with confidence and power. So kudos to SCV. Different strokes and all...

Edited by jaylogan
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw SVC online only.  And after one viewing - heck, throughout the entire viewing - I knew I LOVED their show, both musically and visually.  Musically I thought it was a masterpiece, although I knew none of the music.  I have a music degree.  I marched & taught for several years, and consider myself 'old-school' when it comes to drum corps.  So I am an expert on nothing!  But I know what I like.  And even with things I don't like or prefer, I am always able to find artistic merit, because I know my opinion is not fact and is not shared with everyone.

So for this original poster to call this show an EPIC FAIL as if he/she is an expert....well, I consider that review to be an epic fail!  In fact, having listened to the original source material, I am amazed at how seamlessly and beuatifully SCV was able to integradte all these themes musically and visually in a way that was endlessly compelling.  And yes, I can't stop hearing the tunes in my head.  For me (I've been a DCI fan since the mid-1970's), this is is one of the Top 10 shows ever.  Of course this is just my opinion.  Nice job, SVC.  Well deserved!!

 

Ross

1984-88 Garfield Cadets

FHNSAB

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, whitedj2002 said:

schooled the self proclaimed  "scholar" :thumbs-up:

 it sort of reminds me of watching an infant's 1st response to a sound they have not heard before. Such as a doorbell ring. Typically, the reaction from the infant tends to be one of fear when the doorbell rings for them for that first time. They might even cry upon hearing it the first time. However, once the infant learns there is no danger to them from that door bell ring, repeated exposure to them of the door bell ringing, does not cause them alarm, concern, or angst. They learn not to cry with that sound ...through repeated exposures to that sound. But can we then conclude from this that the infant " likes " or " prefers ", the sound ? No. For all we know, he or she has become satisfactorially accustomed to that door bell sound ring, but prefers the door bell not ring at all, and would " like " that as a " preference " if given the choice.

Edited by BRASSO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Lance said:

people like the OP really think they have some special insight

it's kind of adorable

Well, he DOES have a BM from Juilliard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...