Is the quest for high G.E becoming too dangerous

[MikeD]

3 hours ago, Stu said:

Let's make sure you are sure.Take away the props from Bluecoats in 2016, Blue Devils in 2017, SCV in 2018, have them do the same or similar things on the ground with the same quality, and they still win with the same scoring; are you 'sure'?

As long as what was done is of equal value, they should. If their Plan B is not equal to the Plan A show, they may not receive as high a score. 

[Sideways]

14 hours ago, Stu said:

This should also be the case if plan B is actually plan A. Correct?

Plan B is a terrible show concept.

[Stu]

23 minutes ago, MikeD said:

As long as what was done is of equal value, they should. If their Plan B is not equal to the Plan A show, they may not receive as high a score. 

Equal value. Hmmm. That, of course, is defined by the judges. Ok. Here in 2019, would the sound of high quality three-valve G bugles be considered as equal in value to Bb bugles if they were played by the exact same performers? Would a show design consistiing of complex drill and body sculpture be considered as equal in value in design as modern staging with props if performed by the same performers? Or is the adjudication now skewed to prefering the Bb sound over the G, and staging over drill, in the name of progression, thus they would not be considered equal in value? Are you sure everything in the subjective world of adjudication is really equal?

[MikeD]

31 minutes ago, Stu said:

Equal value. Hmmm. That, of course, is defined by the judges. Ok. Here in 2019, would the sound of high quality three-valve G bugles be considered as equal in value to Bb bugles if they were played by the exact same performers? Would a show design consistiing of complex drill and body sculpture be considered as equal in value in design as modern staging with props if performed by the same performers? Or is the adjudication now skewed to prefering the Bb sound over the G, and staging over drill, in the name of progression, thus they would not be considered equal in value? Are you sure everything in the subjective world of adjudication is really equal?

Not sure how you wound your way to the above comparisons from the earlier discussion, but for now...here goes...

'Equal value' is determined by what and how the judges evaluate performances/shows, a totally subjective concept, as has always been the case.  They. use the criteria and scoring methodologies decided by the corps themselves at winter meetings. If adjudication is "skewed", it is skewed to determine ranking and ratings based on the desires of the corps. Does the show with complex drill/body sculpture align itself with the judging criteria to achieve a maximum score? Or would it be missing some of the elements contained in the various adjudication standards? Talking in generalities about show designs is really impossible. Ditto the G vs Bb horns comparison. Bb horns are here to stay, so the difference in sonority and timbre of a G horn section might be an issue with the evaluation. Again, talking generalities and what-ifs in a vacuum is impossible. 

 

[Jeff Ream]

47 minutes ago, Stu said:

Equal value. Hmmm. That, of course, is defined by the judges. Ok. Here in 2019, would the sound of high quality three-valve G bugles be considered as equal in value to Bb bugles if they were played by the exact same performers? Would a show design consistiing of complex drill and body sculpture be considered as equal in value in design as modern staging with props if performed by the same performers? Or is the adjudication now skewed to prefering the Bb sound over the G, and staging over drill, in the name of progression, thus they would not be considered equal in value? Are you sure everything in the subjective world of adjudication is really equal?

would the G's be as in tune with the same quality of sound? Just because you change the key of the horn doesn't mean everything is the same. Now corps at the lower levels of the rankings sound better on Bb than they did G. 

If the drill was performed as well and everything flowed and made sense, yes. 

[Stu]

7 hours ago, MikeD said:

Not sure how you wound your way to the above comparisons from the earlier discussion, but for now...here goes...

'Equal value' is determined by what and how the judges evaluate performances/shows, a totally subjective concept, as has always been the case.  They. use the criteria and scoring methodologies decided by the corps themselves at winter meetings. If adjudication is "skewed", it is skewed to determine ranking and ratings based on the desires of the corps. Does the show with complex drill/body sculpture align itself with the judging criteria to achieve a maximum score? Or would it be missing some of the elements contained in the various adjudication standards? Talking in generalities about show designs is really impossible. Ditto the G vs Bb horns comparison. Bb horns are here to stay, so the difference in sonority and timbre of a G horn section might be an issue with the evaluation. Again, talking generalities and what-ifs in a vacuum is impossible. 

 

How I arrived here is the claim that equal value would be palced upon a plan B performance which would not contain one or more of current trends such as 3-D staging.

It is still within the rules for a corps to go completely accoustic without electronics, for a corps to use G bugles ( which can be played extremely well in tune), for a corps to design complex drill instead of 3-D prop staging. But there is a part of your response which actually indicates that if a show design is missing elements, as in not pushing the progressive design trends adjudicators are seeking, it will not score well; no matter the quality of the performance. Which flys in the face of thinking plan B could score as high if performed with the same quality. However.....

The key in your response is that it is based on what the corps desire. I have a gut feeling that if the design staff of a high caliber mover and shaker corps like BD, for instance, decided that retro was in vogue, that retro was the new progressive direction, retro G sound was needed, retro whiplahsh drill was required, retro raw power, retro no gimmicks, that the retro sound and look would become the design elements standards interpreted as being desirable.

Edited March 26, 2019 by Stu

[cixelsyd]

7 hours ago, MikeD said:

'Equal value' is determined by what and how the judges evaluate performances/shows, a totally subjective concept, as has always been the case.  They. use the criteria and scoring methodologies decided by the corps themselves at winter meetings. If adjudication is "skewed", it is skewed to determine ranking and ratings based on the desires of the corps. Does the show with complex drill/body sculpture align itself with the judging criteria to achieve a maximum score? Or would it be missing some of the elements contained in the various adjudication standards?

Ahh, so that is how it works.  Once a new thing gets inserted somewhere in "the various adjudication standards", it becomes a required element.  Its absence reduces the scoring potential of a corps.

Quote

Ditto the G vs Bb horns comparison. Bb horns are here to stay, so the difference in sonority and timbre of a G horn section might be an issue with the evaluation. 

Here is where it gets confusing.  I am fairly certain that "Bb horns are here to stay" is not written anywhere in the various adjudication standards.  Therefore, the expectation ought to be what we were told when the rule change was made... which was that Bb/F would be an option, not a requirement.

[waliman4444]

Please stay on topic...if it has run it"s course then let it be done..otherwise safety vs. GE innovations(good or bad)

[Stu]

9 minutes ago, waliman4444 said:

Please stay on topic...if it has run it"s course then let it be done..otherwise safety vs. GE innovations(good or bad)

The quest for high score on GE, the competitive aspect, seems to be driving the bus which is creating situations of perceived dangers of things like 3-D staging and acrobatics on stages. What the discussion also entails is a question concerning if a corps fails to utilize modern progressive design, instrumentation, etc, will they score just as well. That is also relevant to how much of a push will continue in moving into more percieved dangerous activity.

[Jeff Ream]

1 hour ago, Stu said:

The quest for high score on GE, the competitive aspect, seems to be driving the bus which is creating situations of perceived dangers of things like 3-D staging and acrobatics on stages. What the discussion also entails is a question concerning if a corps fails to utilize modern progressive design, instrumentation, etc, will they score just as well. That is also relevant to how much of a push will continue in moving into more percieved dangerous activity.

well no, you kinda morphed it into that direction.