Sensitive topic...

[RB Ripley]

What defines a difficult visual package in your opinion?... Ready...set.....go!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Overall, I believe that music's the heart of the spectacle that is drum corps. So it is the music, that "dictates" the visual package. From show "concept" to staging, costuming and movement, the music provides the visual "parameters."

Rather than look at a show's visual package strictly through the the lens of difficulty, which seems to be all too prevalent today, I prefer to assess the appropriateness of a show's visual elements in relation the music.

I believe that difficulty falls into one of two general categories: 1. Demand on the performers (end of 1991 Star, pick a year for Cadets!) or 2. Demand on the part of the audience (BD 2005, Cadets 1988, Star 1993). Good designers are acutely aware of which of these two categories (or the mixture) their current show, chart, sequence or picture falls under and know how to exploit it.

As far as snapshot vs. speed - these are just two tools designers can use to either support or contradict what the music suggests. Smart designers have the theatrical sense to know when to most effectively use any visual element to either support or contradict audience expectations and how to create contrast within a show. There's nothing more exciting than surprising an audience (in a good way!) by giving them the exact opposite of what they expected (end of SCV '88). On the other hand, building up the anticipation on the road to an anticipated event is a great design challenge that can offer wonderful reward for both performer and audience (Madison '88).

For my taste, too many corps attempt to use visual elements with the sole intention of speed/difficulty and the final visual package doesn't seem seem to have an inherent connection to the music. This also results in sacrificing of musical excellence - some don't mind it, but I'd much rather see a little less speed that translates exponentially into cleaner/louder music.

For my tastebuds, this year's Carolina Crown is an outstanding example of music guiding the visual interpretation. While a number of people here on the boards have called for them to try something harder, I believe that their visual package is so very appropriate for the music. And it is this appropriateness allowed the designers to achieve moments that are both surprising and inevitable. I believe that's the highest praise for a show in any activity that is performed before an audience.

As always, the above is stated IMHO.

Finally, what a terrific question! Nikk, you're always looking for new perspectives - something I appreciate a great deal. Keep these great discussions coming!

Edited August 8, 2005 by RB Ripley

[Ryan H. Turner]

The best drill is Nikk's drill. Period. End of story.

HI NIKK!!

Seriously--I can't add too much on to what everyone else has said, although from a BAND stand point where I have my most impact, the ACHIEVEMENT level of the band should be central to how I put my shows together. Unbelievable what I see some folks put some bands through for the sake of wanting to have "good drill", and the kids are struggling just to figure out which way to put the horn up to their chops.

Good points by everyone. And like Nikk, I LOVE drill design. I wish I could be MUCH better at it, but for where I am in my skills, I just love doing it , and I love watching others.

[Tsar Nikk]

The best drill is Nikk's drill.  Period.  End of story.

HI NIKK!!

Seriously--I can't add too much on to what everyone else has said, although from a BAND stand point where I have my most impact, the ACHIEVEMENT level of the band should be central to how I put my shows together.  Unbelievable what I see some folks put some bands through for the sake of wanting to have "good drill", and the kids are struggling just to figure out which way to put the horn up to their chops.

Good points by everyone.  And like Nikk, I LOVE drill design.  I wish I could be MUCH better at it, but for where I am in my skills, I just love doing it , and I love watching others.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Heh heh...thanks Ryan...however, I am also a work in progress, and try to get better every year. It's a little frustrating sometimes trying to write drill for groups with very small percussion and guard sections...it feels like there is so much more I can accomplish if I had a decent sized percussion and guard...how do you feel about that? Or do you just get bigger bands?

I've unfortunately lost a lot of customers as they leave their schools to get their Masters or, in the case of one, leave for fundraising/uniform companies. It seems like I have had bad luck in that area lately. Need to rebuild my customer base.

[2003Ageout]

I'm of the group of people who enjoy the movement between the snapshots. When you think about it, that moment in drill where you get that photograph of what the designer had in mind is only 5% (at most) compared to the rest of the show when the corps is moving. It's the pages that look good, but the setup to get there is even more important to me.

Sure i'm a SCV fanboy, but using Myron's drill as an example...

...2000. Everyone remembers the * formation that turns into the box as it folds out on itself. on paper, i'm sure people were like..."uh...weak". But once they saw how it formed up...yikes!!!

so yeah, that's my dealie-o.

[Galen]

Two elements of drill that I like are "danger" and "surprise"; doing a move that you watch and either say, "How did they do THAT?" (Star '91) or else can barely watch because if one person misses an interval, direction change, etc, somebody else is going to get HURT (first example that comes to mind: Glassmen's closer triangle pass-through with the 360 at the end in '01).

[wesleyrp]

I would also ditto Galen's respense by saying surprise. Seeing something unexpected. I also love drill that has great transitions. There are many drill writers out there that use a lot of pictures in their drill, however, I believe that this can be overated. Think back on all the great Cavalier drill movements, some of the best moves are simply a transition to or from an idea. i would also agree that the drill design needs to be expressive. This is where the body movement segment comes into play as a great design must be sold and have embellishment. I would also concur that speed is important, however, it is the varying of the speeds that can make a design interesting.

Wes P.

[Jeff Ream]

What defines a difficult visual package in your opinion?  I fully realize that this is going to basically be all opinion, and how certain visual packages affect YOU.  Don't worry about trying to convince anyone that your preference is right, and let's hope no one gets on this thread and tries o bully anyone into their way of thinking.

Would you rather see a very fast drill, but little in the way of "snapshot moments?"  Or are you a "snapshot moment" kind of person?  Are you simply against speed for the sake of speed or snapshots for the sake of snapshots?

Give some examples of the things you like and maybe not like as much.  Be fair, be courteous, and be understanding of others' viewpoints.

Ready...set.....go!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

to me it is some of both. I like velocity when it's called for, but you also need the snapshot monets too.

if you have too much of either, it becomes overkill and not fun to watch.

[PeeWee]

I like "morphing" or "kaleidescope" drill like Michael Gaines writes for the Cavaliers.

It's not necessarily hard to march (e.g. large in step size or fast tempo), but it's unexpected and unanticipated (i.e. it comes from out of nowhere). It's also "fast" in the sense that it's comprised of many short, 8 count moves or less.

Other corps are FINALLY starting to pick-up on this in 2005! The Madison Scouts and the Phantom Regiment have this same short count, unexpected, morphing drill in their shows this season. Other corps have it as well I'm sure.

The Santa Clara Vanguard had this type of drill in their 2004 closer, right after the "Vanguard!" shout. Very cool B)

[BorisTS]

or else can barely watch because if one person misses an interval, direction change, etc, somebody else is going to get HURT (first example that comes to mind: Glassmen's closer triangle pass-through with the 360 at the end in '01).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ah, the stories I could tell about cleaning this one single move.

That's got to be my favorite set EVER out of the ones I performed.

As for what drill I like in general, I guess I'd lean more towards fast transitions that you don't expect. If it's just running for the sake of running, though, you're going to be working a lot harder to generate a lot less effect. You can use contrary motion or a mesh to make something look faster than it really is.

I like some kind of snapshot at the hits, obviously-- this can give the effect of a visual climax, as well as get your hornline closer together, making it easier to clean and blend. I especially like it if the "snap shot" is unexpected, like when the drill writer has added a great transition where different parts of the corps have meshed, rotated, expanded or contracted to make the shape appear out of nowhere.

Bonus if the shape is sort of unusual-- SCV has done this a lot, where they form a type of triangle or a curvilinear set that is unique.

[ekleve]

I am a total sucker for speed. That is what attracted me to drum corps in the first place. I saw '99 SCV on video. I think one of the greatest things about drum corps is that they push the physical limit on what can be done on the field. I know drum corps wasn't always like that, but that's what I love about it now!

Obviously there is good drill and bad drill regardless of speed. But speed usually thrills me. Even 2001 Colts thrills me because of speed! They were really hauling ###!! That show was AWESOME!!!

SCV and Cavaliers have done a lot of my favorite fast drill. But a show doesn't always need to be fast to be good. '98 Bluecoats is one of my favorite shows and it certainly wasn't very fast.

I like to see the relentless energy in the marchers. '01 Crossmen is a great example of this.