SCV's show was an epic musical fail.

[Cappybara]

1 minute ago, skevinp said:

That's not what an ad hominem attack is.  Other people did not make this about him and his degree, HE made it about him and his degree.  It is not a diversion from his position, it is part of his position.  

One thing that makes the OP so ridiculous is that he pretty much premises his entire argument that SCV's music is an epic musical fail on the assertion that SCV's show is not entertaining to people in general, and that it failed to connect emotionally, all while being surrounded by actual overwhelming evidence that it was popular with drum corps fans, and that the music connected emotionally with a lot of people.  He appears to believe he knows better than we do what we, ourselves, like.  

I don't disagree with you. I've pointed out as such that the OP has a lot of insightful and detailed points but where he falls short is that he does not realize his comments are opinion rather than fact. 

[GUARDLING]

1 minute ago, skevinp said:

That's not what an ad hominem attack is.  Other people did not make this about him and his degree, HE made it about him and his degree.  It is not a diversion from his position, it is part of his position.  

One thing that makes the OP so ridiculous is that he pretty much premises his entire argument that SCV's music is an epic musical fail on the assertion that SCV's show is not entertaining to people in general, and that it failed to connect emotionally, all while being surrounded by actual overwhelming evidence that it was popular with drum corps fans, and that the music connected emotionally with a lot of people.  He appears to believe he knows better than we do what we, ourselves, like.  

Bottom line: there are 11 other corps from finals that would love to have the epic fail SCV had.....end of story

[George Dixon]

2 minutes ago, skevinp said:

That's not what an ad hominem attack is.  Other people did not make this about him and his degree, HE made it about him and his degree.  It is not a diversion from his position, it is part of his position.  

One thing that makes the OP so ridiculous is that he pretty much premises his entire argument that SCV's music is an epic musical fail on the assertion that SCV's show is not entertaining to people in general, and that it failed to connect emotionally, all while being surrounded by actual overwhelming evidence that it was popular with drum corps fans, and that the music connected emotionally with a lot of people.  He appears to believe he knows better than we do what we, ourselves, like.  

it's like the famous chef who's restaurant closes due to lack of business

"these people just don't know good food" 

[jwillis35]

I would not call what SCV did an epic fail. Very harsh.  Certainly to some the music is arranged in a way to promote the visuals. It hits fast and hard and, frankly, I really enjoyed the show.

But to be fair I can see where @SWriverstone is coming from.  We had plenty of dialog over this back in the 90s as music became more chopped, spliced, and arranged for the effects...the visuals. I actually feel it has developed some over the years. It is more palatable (on a whole). BD would certainly receive some of this type of criticism, as well as others.

Simply put, it would be very difficult to create truly flowing, developed, and connected phrases and builds in the music in the 12.5 minutes or so of a show. Unless a corps picks one or two pieces of music only. There is no doubt that today we get a somewhat overly arranged, edited, and cut-up music score to these shows due to the sheer number of songs used and the limited show length. The way general effect is judged is part of this.

I try not to over think it too much.  Either the designers can make it work or the show suffers.  Ever since the "chop and bop" 90s this has been the task.  To me SCV was flat-out entertaining and incredible; but I was not judging them on the basis of Brahms-like music construction.  They managed to piece this thing together in a way that it worked flawlessly with their visual/effects program. Is the music choppy and spliced and diced all over the place? Sure. But we could get pretty critical with most corps in that regard.  The OP is not wrong, but I think he is a bit harsh.  Some may not like SCV's music arranging, but it was not an epic musical fail...not if compared to current drum corps/marching band arranging trends.

Edited August 15, 2018 by jwillis35

[Bluzes]

1 minute ago, Cappybara said:

I'm honestly not sure what you're trying to say so Im going to refrain from responding so I don't accidentally twist your words. 

The point is MMs are real people and have feelings and are not to be played for the man on the street so they can agree with him and be hated. I see it as a slap in the face of everything SCV stands for. If you don't ok, I am triggered by bullies and he is a big one or thinks he is. However if you notice he is just a big coward that does not answer any real questions..

[Cappybara]

2 minutes ago, ouooga said:

Downplaying the hurt doesn't make it ok - I agree most SCV members won't read this and even fewer will really take offense, but that doesn't seem to justify that it's ok to provide that level of hurtful critique to something that so many enjoyed and worked hard to deliver. The words weren't 'bad' or even 'I didn't like it'. The words used were 'epic musical fail.' That's as far away from sugarcoating as you can get before DCP's language filters kick in.

Also I'll concede the analogy isn't 1:1. I had more, but it sounds like you get where I was going anyways.

The poster wrote a dissertation of why what people liked is bad, and continued to say that most drum corps fans are not intelligent enough on the subject matter to know the difference. That's hurtful. That's literally bullying. You can't reason with that, you can't rationalize with that. And in the instances where others (myself included) have tried to at least counter with our own knowledge/degrees, we've received criticism from the same poster. Somehow the OP is an expert in all things, including our own enjoyment and careers, and the original post's only goal was to make us see his light so we can renounce our ways. It'd be like a high school bully making fun of your lunch just because he doesn't like it, or saying you're shirt is ugly because he didn't like it.

There's plenty of ways to say you don't like something without being hurtful or telling people they're flat out wrong. And in the event that you do choose to go down that path, and you use your expertise and education to justify your rationale, it's only fair to concede to the expertise and education of others when they discuss the situation from their point of view. OP opened this conversation disrespectfully, and has kept that trend going throughout.

I'm all about being careful when criticizing anything that could potentially be misconstrued as attacking the members so I get you. He certainly wasn't tactful. 

I just personally didn't find the "epic musical fail" comment to be particularly egregious as you and others do, and part of that is because he gave very detailed reasons as to why. This wasn't a low effort troll post. He may be a little too optimistic about how important his opinion is (that's where the lack of tact comes in), but I don't find it malicious towards the members. In my mind that is a critique of the people writing the music. The members have nothing to do with that. 

[BRASSO]

 

[TerriTroop]

On 8/14/2018 at 10:42 AM, SWriverstone said:

The first criterion for great music is that—on the first listen—it moves you.

There were no discernable, memorable melodies in the show

There was no sense of a grounded tempo anywhere in the show

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.

• There was no overall sense of continuity

 

Ok, I've got a short window of time to address more specifically the points that the OP used as the underpinning of his perspective of the definition of quality in music:

The first criterion for great music is that—on the first listen—it moves you.

Nope. There are GREAT pieces of music that leave me "flat" (to use your term). Examples: Mahler. He's a late Romantic period composer who wrote pieces that, for me, feel like navel gazing and take too long to develop. BORING. (to me) But is is great music? ABSO-EFFIN-LUTELY. I have friends who live and breathe Mahler because it moves them. I'm just not in agreement with them. Who is right? Again, I can recognize that the music is "great" even if I am not moved by it.

 

There were no discernable, memorable melodies in the show

Nope. Let's go back again to the Mahler example. I can't hum a single tune from Mahler. Not one. It's still memorable and discernable, but to someone else who is more drawn to it.

 

There was no sense of a grounded tempo anywhere in the show. 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.

Again, NOPE. You aren't paying attention enough to the show then. There are plenty of places in the show in which there is a groove, a place to live in the meter and tempo for a while before the "composer" (arrangers) shifts gears.

 

There was no overall sense of continuity

Ok, that's how you feel. I get that. I have my own problems with some of the continuity of the show. But to say there was NO overall sense of continuity is a bit too strong.

 

It's drum corps. SCV's Babylon is great show to many fans, and some don't like it. It's not an "epic fail" according to your criteria because your criteria were entirely subjective despite the attempt to make them sound objective. It's not a crime or anything. It's just a logical fallacy that your criteria were somehow not related to taste.

 

Also, "mere-exposure effect" is a longer and more complicated conversation. I would love to go there, but later. (time's up again!)

 

 

[cixelsyd]

1 hour ago, Jeff Ream said:

the activity tried for 20 years to continue to try new things AND appease the older fan that only liked their version of drum corps. And it didnt work. Going back to solely what was isn't going to work. going forward, even at a cost, has actually helped. so stay that course

You will have to remind me what they did to try and appease the older fan... because today, when I look back over the historical horizon, it looks like ever since they got control over things in 1972, they have been changing things as fast as they could afford to.  The only pause in this 40+ year flurry of changes was in the mid-1990s, during the DCI financial crisis.

[ouooga]

Just now, Cappybara said:

I'm all about being careful when criticizing anything that could potentially be misconstrued as attacking the members so I get you. He certainly wasn't tactful. 

I just personally didn't find the "epic musical fail" comment to be particularly egregious as you and others do, and part of that is because he gave very detailed reasons as to why. This wasn't a low effort troll post. He may be a little too optimistic about how important his opinion is (that's where the lack of tact comes in), but I don't find it malicious towards the members. In my mind that is a critique of the people writing the music. The members have nothing to do with that. 

To be fair, I'm more triggered by the lack of tact than anything else. Also I was told by a person with a music degree that he knows more about music than me (I'll concede that) and marketing (that's where I'm going to draw the line). Finally, the entire opening of the discussion was explaining to me that what I like is wrong and I need to become educated so I can finally know what to really like. Altogether, I came away from the original post offended, and feeling like I just received a lecture from a bully.

After that, I've mostly been addressing the 'what's' to illustrate the points. Though I'll stand by, as a writer too, 'epic musical fail' is bordering on the words I'd use if I wanted to hurt someone who was proud of their music.

As for the members, I guess that's a personal question, down to each member. On my end, by July, the show was mine. If someone didn't like 'the show', I assumed they were judging me, not the thing someone else wrote for me a few months ago. OP did say "SCV's show was an epic musical fail,' and the members definitely are the composition of SCV.