The Zone

[LAMystreaux]

This comes from someone who only saw the Cinecast in 2005, saw and heard DVDs and CDs from 2003 and looks forward to ESPN's broadcast and possible DVDs and CDs from this past season, if only to appreciate more aspects of the Cadets show besides the drumspeak and Kill Bill!

the Cadets drumspeak was done well.  the BD 03 drumspeak was new.  Other than that, Cadets drumspeak drew a reaction.  BD '03 was quick-movement, field coverage, then wham! block chords a spacechord, and runs, not necessarily in that order.  The Cadets '05 and BD '03 shows are alike in their level of challenge.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Who cares where someone sees and hears it? Its just an opinion. . .and a valid one at that.

[PR ROCKS]

Thanks to one of the previous posters for correcting me, I had forgotten that "Liquid" was original music. Like I said each time I posted, I liked Cadets, thought they should win....ah, I'll just leave it at that. Congratulations Cadets.

[Sexyguardcap]

This comes from someone who only saw the Cinecast in 2005, saw and heard DVDs and CDs from 2003 and looks forward to ESPN's broadcast and possible DVDs and CDs from this past season, if only to appreciate more aspects of the Cadets show besides the drumspeak and Kill Bill!

the Cadets drumspeak was done well.  the BD 03 drumspeak was new.  Other than that, Cadets drumspeak drew a reaction.  BD '03 was quick-movement, field coverage, then wham! block chords a spacechord, and runs, not necessarily in that order.  The Cadets '05 and BD '03 shows are alike in their level of challenge.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As much as I love My Blue Devils you can not equate the 2 seconds of set up they did with what the Bluecoats and Cadets did.

You'll see that kind of drum solo set up in Bridgemen, 27th, Madison. in the 80's

[dbc03]

Yep. in 1989, they definitely started their show BEFORE the announcer said "Is the corps ready?" and then the announcer had to say "Cadets of Bergen County, you may enter the field for competition" which seemed to occur after they were approx 20 seconds into the opener.

It felt like an error in 89 and IMO it felt like an error this year too when I saw the Cadets at the Quarters broadcast. By "error", I mean like something was messed up. I don't mean it felt like a poor artistic choice. It just seemed like they had accidentally started the show and forgot to wait for the announcer.

Can anybody speak to what the goal is there? Are they actually attempting to disorient the crowd, or make the misplaced announcements part of the "art"?

Is there any reason why the announcer has to say anything at all once they start the on field warmup? Is it a DCI rule or requirement?  Because I'd be ALL for changing it if it allowed the for the elimination of an unnecessary intrusion by the announcer. (Since they're gonna let them flow from warmup into the competition show anyway... )

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The announcement of "You may enter the field for competition" is when the timing starts. If he had done all that before the on field warm up they would have probably been over time by half a minute... interestingly enough, that would be a 1 point penalty and in the grand scheme of things wouldn't have mattered

[George82]

I love how there are nine pages and barely any of the posts touch the subject ie: innovation !

This isnt about wether they are good or not, liked or not, deserved to win or not.

A ) They were good, IMO

B  ) Many did like them, IMO

C ) THey did deserve to win.

Now, can people strip their attitudes and discuss/debate the facts ??

You can not ignore that this show came before in the high school level, it just shows flaws in your deductin and reasoning, its a fact.

Visual design and judges opinions still do not have anything to do with innovation.

judges can like it, especially if its written for them, they will give the numbers required. The design is not perfect, innovative, not even the best ever.

Members dont need to "throw down" or try an "intimidate" others into submission or silence. Congratulations, you won, you deserved, you performed on an extremely high level...I do not have to fall in line or kiss your feet to give you your credit, I can back up my statments in person...I always do.

I have no qualms with George Hopkins, I know him, I have spoken to him numerous times, and it wasnt always "rah rah" and there were quite a few times he look at me with an upturned brow (LOL) SO what ! He's human, so am I, and hes an adult, he can handle different opinions, he can take criticism, its the real reason my review was posted on his blog.

Again, Borg..I mean, Cadet fanatics, get over yourself, your corps, no coprs walk on water. All corps offer something positive, and all corps are subject to criticism.

Now, can you get back to the topic and debate the innovation ?

~G~

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In response to your original post I asked if you had seen the HS Band show which you contend the 2005 Cadet program was based. You have conveniently failed to answer that question. I will present it once again....have you seen the show or have you just jumped on the bandwagaon? Can you back up your blanket statement??? You claim that you can back up your statements. Well, here's your opportunity. I'm calling you out.-

You infer that the entire show The Cadets performed was lifted from a HS marching band. I seriously doubt that. Elements and concepts may have served as inspiration but I highly doubt the entire show was a ripoff. What information do you have....enlighten the rest of us.

You ask for posters to "strip their attitudes" and "discuss/debate facts" and you then proceed to address "Cadet fanatics" as "Borg"??? YOU sir are the one who truly needs to get over himself. Commentary such as this illustrates the lack of credibility you so obvously have. Unfortunately opinions are like, well, you know. You have every right to yours. However, your opinions are not gospel.

BTW, if you think the real reason why your review was posted on Hop's Blog is because he can take criticism I've got news for you. HELLLOOOO....MCFLYYYYY!!! :lolhit:

[George82]

Just a couple of quick notes here....

Bridgemen whistled the beginning of "Big Noise From Winnetka" in 1980 and The Cadets first did a moving warmup in 1988 playing "Fanfare For The Common Man".

[bradrick]

The announcement of "You may enter the field for competition" is when the timing starts.  If he had done all that before the on field warm up they would have probably been over time by half a minute... interestingly enough, that would be a 1 point penalty and in the grand scheme of things wouldn't have mattered

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's my understanding that somebody was actually on the front sideline telling the timing judge when to start timing the field show (since there was no break between the warmup and the field show). I didn't think it was tied to the announcement. Actually, I would almost swear on the MP3 from Cadets in finals in San Antonio you can hear somebody say "(something unclear) Now" at 33 seconds into the file - right as the whistling is ending (right before the tempo change). Which sounds IMO like someone telling the timing judge to start timing the show. (Anybody else notice this?)

If that's true, I'd still like to know if there's a rule that says an announcer MUST make the "You may enter the field for competition" announcement (or for that matter, ANY announcements) - since the rules allow an on-field warmup to flow directly into the show. If it's not true, then can somebody who knows for sure (or has seen the DCI rulebook maybe?) please let me know.

It' not a biggie deal, but something I'm curious about. Maybe dbc03 is right and I have bad info.

Anybody know?

(FYI, this is not announcer bashing. I'm sure they're all doing exactly what they think they are supposed to do.)

--------------

Unrelated comment:

The mellophone solo at the end of the ballad on the same MP3 is freakin' sweet! I bow to him!

Edited September 1, 2005 by bradrick

[mobrien]

You infer that the entire show The Cadets performed was lifted from a HS marching band.  I seriously doubt that.  Elements and concepts may have served as inspiration but I highly doubt the entire show was a ripoff.  What information do you have....enlighten the rest of us.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Are you inferring he's inferring, or you implying he's implying? B)

So now I'm curious - how similar can two pieces of fiction, painting, movies, or pieces of music be with the latter item still being 'original'? If I write a book set in the 1920s about a rich guy on West Egg named Gritsby who strives to recapture a lost romance from a few years ago with a beautiful debutante from Memphis (though she's married to a brute who also happens to be having an affair with the wife of the local butcher), have I really done anything original or have I simply taken the general outline of "The Great Gatsby" and changed the details to suit?

"Ulysses" uses the template of The Odyssey, but isn't 'copying' Homer so much as reflecting on it. "Forbidden Planet" updates Shakespeare's "The Tempest". But in each case, there's an effort to completely re-contextualize the original item to find resonance within the new framework. Were the Cadets re-contextualizing or were they borrowing an idea and specific design elements that they liked without crediting the original presenting organization?

Edited September 1, 2005 by mobrien

[Matt_S]

It felt like an error in 89 and IMO it felt like an error this year too when I saw the Cadets at the Quarters broadcast. By "error", I mean like something was messed up. I don't mean it felt like a poor artistic choice. It just seemed like they had accidentally started the show and forgot to wait for the announcer.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ah, see I thought it worked beautifully this year, moreso than in 2003. The choice of Twisted Nerve was absolutely perfect, and set the mood so much so that I don't think the rest of the show would have had the same effect without it. It was like the soundtrack intro during the opening credits of a movie, that gets you exciting and intrigued for what you're about to see. :)

[Matt_S]

Were the Cadets re-contextualizing or were they borrowing an idea and specific design elements that they liked without crediting the original presenting organization?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, none of us can really answer that unless we've seen both shows, I guess. I too would like to hear if ~G~ has seen this Mona Shores show that he claims to know so much about. Heh, after all "have you seen the show?" seems to be his favorite question for anyone else with an opinion.

But I have a couple of points in response to what you've said. For one, the show was transferred from the marching band idiom to the drum corps idiom. Yeah, the two are largely similar, but there are some differences that necessitate "re-contextualizing" rather than simply recreating.

Second, we have the repertoires. I can't find what Mona Shores played in 2004, but I'm going to guess that it wasn't the original music that we heard in Liquid and in the closer. Unless they played New World Overture and Cvalda, which would surprise me, then the different repertoire demands "re-contextualization" rather than recreation.

Finally, we have the fact that Marc Sylvester was behind the concept of both shows. To use literary reference, Ayn Rand's books are all framed around the same basic theme, which would be Rand's ethos of ultra-capitalism and the virtue of selfishness. Now, are we to call Atlas Shrugged uncreative because it came after The Fountainhead and presented us with the same basic concept? I think rather that this is a definitive case of what it means to re-contextualize, and I think the fact that Marc Sylvester was behind both the Mona Shores program and the Cadets program suggests strongly that the latter was a re-contextualization of his own earlier idea.

Both are creative, now let's sit back and enjoy them as such. :)