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

[Stu]

53 minutes ago, MikeD said:

The sheets and criteria used for evaluations were created by the corps themselves, staffs and admins, with judge input, for sure. For that reason, they are good for those most impacted, the corps being evaluated. 

Throwing "qualified professionals" from other genres of music and/or dance into judging who have no background in marching music, and no idea how to rank and rate the corps, is looking to create chaos, IMO. How do they know how to award numbers for each subcaption? How do they know what to look for? Using their own background and trying to relate it to marching/music experience is just apples and oranges, IMO.

Having said that, I do think that having those type of folks create tapes and talk about how the shows/performance appear to them is absolutely a great idea, but not as part of the adjudication process.

 

But the current drum corps adjudicating system does not leave much room for diversity of sound, either corps to corps or genera to genera. There are subtle differences, that is true, but not major diversity like in other generas. For example...

In the professional world of Jazz, the Smoking Section sounds vastly different than the Harry Conick Jr. Band. In the professional world of Symphony, the Chicago Symphony sounds different than the London Symphony. Even when these Jazz or Symphonic ensembles are playing the exact same compositions with the exact same instrumentation. Same applies to the professional worlds of Rock, Country, Funk, etc.

However, in Drum Corps, the criteria for qualitative Music GE is so strictly defined by the corps design staff that every corps now attempts to produce the exact same musical presentation of sound; no matter the genera; no matter the corps idenity. Again there are some subtle differences, but everyone strives for that Crown, BD, SCV winning sound.

Blowing out the current system; having a diverse number of non drum corps professionals write the sheets, define the criteria, be in charge of judge's training, and then judging the ensembles would more than likely bring forth way more diversity of musical production and corps sound idenity. All the while they are using the same instrumentation. Just like it is in the professional world.

[acolli17]

1 hour ago, MikeD said:

The sheets and criteria used for evaluations were created by the corps themselves, staffs and admins, with judge input, for sure. For that reason, they are good for those most impacted, the corps being evaluated. 

Throwing "qualified professionals" from other genres of music and/or dance into judging who have no background in marching music, and no idea how to rank and rate the corps, is looking to create chaos, IMO. How do they know how to award numbers for each subcaption? How do they know what to look for? Using their own background and trying to relate it to marching/music experience is just apples and oranges, IMO.

Having said that, I do think that having those type of folks create tapes and talk about how the shows/performance appear to them is absolutely a great idea, but not as part of the adjudication process.

 

What ever happened to the disney award? I don't remember what it was other than I think it was fan favorite something, all I remember was Phantom winning it in 2008 and Will Pitts essentially being brought back to life to accept the award when they won it.

Edited June 7, 2019 by acolli17

[Jeff Ream]

1 hour ago, Stu said:

Judges are trained to interpret the sheets in the exact same manner, to define criteria in the exact same manner, to view each corps in the exact same manner, with the desired result being no matter who the judge is at any particular show the caption score should be exactly the same. Trial judging attempts to place that training into a real show situation. And if there is a judge who has a different interp than others on say the Music GE produced by a particular corps, even if that judge can justify the interp, that judge has to conform and score like all other judges in that caption or be weeded out.

I get why; it is for competitive consistency. But what I would like to see is outside professionals working in the real world of professional music write the sheets, define the criteria, and train as judges.

if that was the case, you'd never ever see fluctuation in ranking and rating....and you do see that.

[Jeff Ream]

25 minutes ago, Stu said:

But the current drum corps adjudicating system does not leave much room for diversity of sound, either corps to corps or genera to genera. There are subtle differences, that is true, but not major diversity like in other generas. For example...

In the professional world of Jazz, the Smoking Section sounds vastly different than the Harry Conick Jr. Band. In the professional world of Symphony, the Chicago Symphony sounds different than the London Symphony. Even when these Jazz or Symphonic ensembles are playing the exact same compositions with the exact same instrumentation. Same applies to the professional worlds of Rock, Country, Funk, etc.

However, in Drum Corps, the criteria for qualitative Music GE is so strictly defined by the corps design staff that every corps now attempts to produce the exact same musical presentation of sound; no matter the genera; no matter the corps idenity. Again there are some subtle differences, but everyone strives for that Crown, BD, SCV winning sound.

Blowing out the current system; having a diverse number of non drum corps professionals write the sheets, define the criteria, be in charge of judge's training, and then judging the ensembles would more than likely bring forth way more diversity of musical production and corps sound idenity. All the while they are using the same instrumentation. Just like it is in the professional world.

then fault the corps and offer to assist in designing new sheets. bringing in a name with no experience in the activity to throw out a number invites chaos as mentioned previously.

 

Now just tapes for feedback, advice etc....sure. but not in any way tied to scoring.

[Stu]

1 minute ago, Jeff Ream said:

if that was the case, you'd never ever see fluctuation in ranking and rating....and you do see that.

Oh to the contrary. That fluctuation is not by design but due to human perception not being perfect. The goal is to keep that fluctuation as small as humanly posible.

[Stu]

2 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

then fault the corps and offer to assist in designing new sheets. bringing in a name with no experience in the activity to throw out a number invites chaos as mentioned previously.

 

Now just tapes for feedback, advice etc....sure. but not in any way tied to scoring.

Again, stop with the false representation of throwing out chaotic numbers by some name. That is nowhere near what I am proposing. I appreciate honest debate on what is presented, but again please stop misconstruing what I am proposing.

[Jeff Ream]

9 minutes ago, Stu said:

Oh to the contrary. That fluctuation is not by design but due to human perception not being perfect. The goal is to keep that fluctuation as small as humanly posible.

um no. the judges are told to judge their sheet and their sheet only, rank, then rate. if scores do stay tight it's because they can go back and change them, usually because they may have put up a bigger or smaller spread in a sub box than they wanted, and in several cases on big shows, they want to avoid bottom line ties

[Stu]

49 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

um no. the judges are told to judge their sheet and their sheet only, rank, then rate. if scores do stay tight it's because they can go back and change them, usually because they may have put up a bigger or smaller spread in a sub box than they wanted, and in several cases on big shows, they want to avoid bottom line ties

What you state here is true; but that is not the fluctuation I am referring to.

If for some reason two or more music judges are at the exact same show, 'and judging the exact same music sheet' at the exact same time, the ultimate goal is for both of them to come to the exact same conclusion, with the exact same caption score, and the exact same caption ranking for that specific show. They should both exhibit the exact same opinion on the exact same caption being adjudicated. That is part of what training and trial judging is designed to do in order to help newbies conform (also true).

So, the fluctuation I am referring to comes from human perception differences. That type of fluctuation from judge to judge within DCI is not by design; and any judge who exhibits too much variation from the rest of the pack (even if the variation is justified) will be told bye-bye.

Edited June 7, 2019 by Stu

[cixelsyd]

15 hours ago, Jeff Ream said:

you missed the point. If trained and follow the criteria.....and do more than one read...will the results really be different?

You seem to think they could be, judging from your own subsequent post:

7 hours ago, Jeff Ream said:

if that was the case, you'd never ever see fluctuation in ranking and rating....and you do see that.

And if I recall correctly, the DCI judging system uses subjective judging.  Judging art (particularly "effect" in drum corps) has to be a subjective thing, which involves opinion.  Some diversity of opinion among different people is inevitable, unless... well, unless DCI imposes some kind of influence to make these judging opinions conform to each other (slotting).  So unless the DCI training/trialing/certification process teaches judges to slot, I would think any number of different judges would eventually have opinions that are not in perfect lock-step with each other.

[hughesmr]

Execution/content captions scored by qualified judges, GE scored solely by the audience in attendance via remote smartphone technology