Let's Play A Game - You Can Only Go Forward

[Fran Haring]

7 hours ago, Jeff Ream said:

performed the hell out of it meant they met the criteria on the sheet i was working. Liking it had nothing to do with it. did it match what the descriptors for the top box are on the sheet? Sure did. others also gave it high marks....i believe one of the top 5 highest scores in our circuit's history. 

if you judge the sheet in front of you, and apply the criteria on the sheet, placement may not be spot on top to bottom, nor will the numbers line up exactly, but good is good and will be rewarded.

I mentioned this a few years ago... I used to judge Toastmasters public-speaking contests, and much of what you have said here applied there. The judging sheets were different, of course... but we had specific criteria we needed to look and listen for, and we basically had to do our best to ignore the fact that we might had heard the speaker before and/or liked or disliked his or her style.

There were times when a particular speaker got lower overall marks, even though he or she was the most dynamic speaker of the evening... because the speaker had either ignored, or didn't come close to meeting, a majority of the specific criteria for that speech.  ( A speaker at these contests is expected to have done his or her homework on the criteria going in.) To put it in a drum corps context.... higher marks for GE, if you will... but low marks for content and execution.

 

[MikeD]

6 hours ago, Stu said:

The words on the sheet are the words on the sheet. That is true. However, the sheet does not judge. You do. And it is your interpretation of the words on the sheet based off of your education, your training, and your experience which evaluates, scores, rates, and ranks performances. Due to your education, training, and experience, your interpretation and opinions have merit and value. But there is no way around the fact that your interpretation is 100% purely subjective opinion.

Moreover, two extremely educated, extremely trained, and extremely experienced people can come up with two vastly different interpretations of the same document. All you need to do is look at the Constitution and the Supreme Court to realize it is true. (Please note that was not designed to be taken as political, but only used to show that two extremely qualified people can come to vastly different interpretations of the exact same document).

Observation based on interpritation is always subjective opinion not objective. And there is no way around it. You just want your established defined subjective interpretation opinion to stay intact.

I don't see where Jeff ever claimed interpreting a sheet is anything other than subjective. 

Jeff belongs to a judging association that has a band circuit, TOB. Judges undergo "education, training, and experience" that make up the world of TOB. Bands compete there knowing that they will receive an evaluation based on that "education, training, and experience".  You could give the TOB sheets to anybody outside of that world, and those people may provide a very different perspective, since they do not have the TOB "education, training, and experience". Are they invalid results? No, not necessarily. But, they may not be "TOB" results.

Bands join TOB with an expectation that they will be part of that world.  Throwing them a curve by having judges without a TOB background work a TOB show is not part of what they signed up for when they joined. This is especially important for the bands, since championship eligibility and seedings are based on season-long results. 

 

 

[MikeD]

13 hours ago, Stu said:

You knocked Wynton, a pro with vast symphonic, concert, jazz, blues, experience as not being competent enough to evaluate music GE without your same training on proper sheet interpretation. Think about that. It is a 'this is my apple cart' type opinion where he should be trained to think and evaluate just like you. Well I say reverse it. He and other pros should interp the sheets and train you to think and evaluate like him. Have the judges conform to a more professional opinion of music GE as opposed to academic. That change in subjective opinion of the sheets is what really has your shorts in a wad.

Wynton is amazing, of course, in all of the areas you mention. But, not having a background in marching/music and giving him sheets that contain all sorts of criteria that discuss a melding of music and visual and how effective the show/performance is with aspects of both elements might not be something he would be able to "just do" to a high degree. Though if anyone could make it work, you probably did pick the best example of an actual person who might pull it off. Who knows?

As I said before, I think that bringing in outside people of all artistic areas, music and visual, is a great idea to help train judges in what to look for "outside the box" of the normal viewpoints. Do I want them thrown in to judge a contest and attempt to rank and rate their captions with no background in our world? No, not really. That is not fair to the designers and especially the performers. 

 

[Fran Haring]

30 minutes ago, MikeD said:

I don't see where Jeff ever claimed interpreting a sheet is anything other than subjective. 

Jeff belongs to a judging association that has a band circuit, TOB. Judges undergo "education, training, and experience" that make up the world of TOB. Bands compete there knowing that they will receive an evaluation based on that "education, training, and experience".  You could give the TOB sheets to anybody outside of that world, and those people may provide a very different perspective, since they do not have the TOB "education, training, and experience". Are they invalid results? No, not necessarily. But, they may not be "TOB" results.

Bands join TOB with an expectation that they will be part of that world.  Throwing them a curve by having judges without a TOB background work a TOB show is not part of what they signed up for when they joined. This is especially important for the bands, since championship eligibility and seedings are based on season-long results. 

 

 

Well said, Mike... and it kinda reminds me of the old days, when a corps in one local circuit would compete in another circuit's show and be judged differently than what they were used to. (Wow... pardon the fractured grammar there.  LOL)  

Or a local corps competing at a national show... I know my local junior corps was out of its element when at shows like the World Open or U.S. Open.

Edited June 12, 2019 by Fran Haring

[Fran Haring]

Back to the OP... moving forward...

Full-on laser effects, along the lines of the Trans-Siberian Orchestra's amazing special-effects show.... and holograms and /or videos to allow a corps to do a "Nat King Cole/Natalie Cole" sort of thing.  Say, the Blue Devils playing a tune (or segment of a tune) live, with the Blue Devils from the past (any given year).

[MikeD]

27 minutes ago, Fran Haring said:

Well said, Mike... and it kinda reminds me of the old days, when a corps in one local circuit would compete in another circuit's show and be judged differently than what they were used to. (Wow... pardon the fractured grammar there.  LOL)  

Or a local corps competing at a national show... I know my local junior corps was out of its element when at shows like the World Open or U.S. Open.

Oh, yes. One year in the mid/later 70's the GSC decided to have judges use a "National Linear" approach to judging at the annual clinic/meeting. I was judging and teaching at the time...around 76 or 77. That meant we were to evaluate all corps in the GSC against standards of the Blue Devils, Bayonne, 27th,  etc...and not the "circuit linear" approach.That lasted a couple of weeks, with all sorts of incredibly low scores and zeroed out captions. The directors quietly got together and put a stop to that, and rightly so.

 

[Stu]

MikeD and Fran. I never advocated just throwing a non drum corps professional in hidgely pidgely. That was the accusation by Jeff which started our tiff. Nope; go back and look at all of my posts. I advocated for non drum corps professionals to create the sheets, define the interpretation of critera, and revamp the entire system. Not only tump over the apple cart but to tear it apart and rebuild it with their mindset. It would be fair and equal for all corps, just different than the current system. As for the objective/subjective issue, I am just trying to get Jeff to admit that his adjudicating is just as subjective as any other artistic Interpritation.

Edited June 12, 2019 by Stu

[MikeD]

9 minutes ago, Stu said:

MikeD and Fran. I never advocated just throwing a non drum corps professional in hidgely pidgely. That was the accusation by Jeff which started our tiff. Nope; go back and look at all of my posts. I advocated for non drum corps professionals to create the sheets, define the interpretation of critera, and revamp the entire system. Not only tump over the apple cart but to tear it apart and rebuild it with their mindset. It would be fair and equal for all corps, just different than the current system. As for the objective/subjective issue, I am just trying to get Jeff to admit that his adjudicating is just as subjective as any other artistic Interpritation.

Well then, looking at the above, I am totally against having "non drum corps professionals...create the sheets, define the interpretation of critera, and revamp the entire system". I think having music and visual people from outside the marching/music arts participate and present their own viewpoints and experiences and how they, see things is a great idea. But no, I am not so dismissive of those who work in this little world today as you seem to be. 

[Jeff Ream]

4 hours ago, Stu said:

Having a trumpt player play an A into an oscilloscope, measuring the wave to see how close it is to 440 without wavering, is an objective evaluation. So please infom us how your sheet interprative observation is objective, not the sheet itself, but how your application was objective.

who said anything about objective? you're the one who wants to bring people with no #### clue about drum corps and have them rank and rate. Good god you'll argue anything. Go exacerbate yourself

[Jeff Ream]

1 hour ago, Fran Haring said:

I mentioned this a few years ago... I used to judge Toastmasters public-speaking contests, and much of what you have said here applied there. The judging sheets were different, of course... but we had specific criteria we needed to look and listen for, and we basically had to do our best to ignore the fact that we might had heard the speaker before and/or liked or disliked his or her style.

There were times when a particular speaker got lower overall marks, even though he or she was the most dynamic speaker of the evening... because the speaker had either ignored, or didn't come close to meeting, a majority of the specific criteria for that speech.  ( A speaker at these contests is expected to have done his or her homework on the criteria going in.) To put it in a drum corps context.... higher marks for GE, if you will... but low marks for content and execution.

 

shhh Stu will claim it's not objective