ZSDAvenger Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 (edited) obviously, phantom&phitch should've used a bunch of smilies. B) :P b**bs :) *edited for spelling* Edited March 31, 2006 by ZSDAvenger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stick Stack Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 (edited) obviously, phantom&phitch should've used a bunch of smilies. B) :P b**bs :) *edited for spelling* I know exactly what you're talking about. You really can say anything as long as you put a smily after it. Plus, you're a complete moron. ^0^ b**bs B) I like the idea of the show with the best design AND best performance winning, and I believe this is generally what ends up happening. Now, I do recall that in 2001, I thought the Cavaliers had a great show design that was not executed as well as the Blue Devils.... but they still won under the current system. However, I believe that in 2003 SPIN Cycle was a well designed show that also had execution issues and came in 2nd behind another wonderfully executed Blue Devils show. I guess it happens both ways. However, for the most part, I think the system works well, but has room for improvement. For instance, I think shows that are exciting like classic Madison Scouts drum Corps a la 1995 will not be rewarded as much today even if it is executed very well, because it is missing that level of intellectualism that seems necessary to be in the top ranks. I think this is because of the way General Effect is geared less towards impact and effect on audience and more towards the flow and complexity of the whole show. Edited March 31, 2006 by Stick Stack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morgoth Bauglir Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 That makes sense. Spend less time trying to impress the judges and write more of what they used to play. More of what all the fans like. And what wise sage knows what "the fans" like? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZSDAvenger Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 I like the idea of the show with the best design AND best performance winning, and I believe this is generally what ends up happening. Now, I do recall that in 2001, I thought the Cavaliers had a great show design that was not executed as well as the Blue Devils.... but they still won under the current system. However, I believe that in 2003 SPIN Cycle was a well designed show that also had execution issues and came in 2nd behind another wonderfully executed Blue Devils show. I guess it happens both ways. I agree one hundred percent. (no really, I do.) Ya butt head. B) ^0^ b**bs Of all the 00's Cavalier shows....03 is my favorite. Im surprised that their brass score wasnt closer to BD's, actually. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 So how does reallocating the point values help, even if that is true? more emphasis on performance less on "effect" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 No, spend just as much time impressing the judges, but focus the judges more towards how well the corps performs that night and less towards what the designers have written all year.Mind you, I'm not saying show design shouldn't be taken into consideration, just that it should be less of a factor in competition than it is now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brakedrum Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 GE is the very reason why it appeals to spectators. The drill design is GE, the way its done is execution All the shimmering elements, timbres and colours from the front ensemble is GE, the way its done is execution, the way it contributes with the rest of the ensemble is music. etc, etc. I think GE is and has always been the big selling point of DCI, the entertainment factor is what is important! for instance: 1995 Cadets of Bergen County....that show had incredible GE...in lieu of their execution and music scores, everything that we liked about the show was GE...the cool drill moves, the swing dancing, the bass drum feature ala Gene Kruppa.... just think Madison without GE isnt Madison. or remember VK? GE is what got them into top 12, obviously supported by enough point in the other catagories. A few judges I have talked with have always maintained "sure, its easy to get caught up with the audience...when they love something, its hard to seperate yourself from that excitement" I also think the dci audience, although now diminishing, is more sophisticated to realize what has been done with exceptional execution in order to pull off the GE, if rifle lines perfectly execute their moves, when drumlines wow with visuals, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 more emphasis on performance less on "effect" Your comment was this: "all performance captions these days discuss way too much design", thus my comment. How does shifting point values have one thing at all to do with what is 'discussed' by judges, assuming you are correct on that, which I'd need a lot of evidence to agree with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rut-roh Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 For instance, I think shows that are exciting like classic Madison Scouts drum Corps a la 1995 will not be rewarded as much today even if it is executed very well, because it is missing that level of intellectualism that seems necessary to be in the top ranks. I think this is because of the way General Effect is geared less towards impact and effect on audience and more towards the flow and complexity of the whole show. I'm glad that you specified "flow and complexity" because those are two of the things that were notoriously lacking in the 1995 Scouts VISUAL production, IMO. It had nothing to do with intellectualism or a lack thereof. They did, after all, finish 2nd in Music GE, so apparently whatever they were playing was "intellectual" enough to be comparable to "The Planets" according to the judges. Their Visual GE scores, however, suffered because they simply could not match the complexity and flow of the corps at the very top. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CozyChopsCom Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 <snip> I think the system works well, but has room for improvement. For instance, I think shows that are exciting like classic Madison Scouts drum Corps a la 1995 will not be rewarded as much today even if it is executed very well, because it is missing that level of intellectualism that seems necessary to be in the top ranks. I think this is because of the way General Effect is geared less towards impact and effect on audience and more towards the flow and complexity of the whole show. The current judging structure is probably fine, the 6 + 2, the averaging. However, the intelligentsia element...To emulate their fractal geometry lingo: My personal desires re current GE judging are tangent to the circle, certainly not in the inner circle. As a fan, I want to be entertained. If "flow and complexity" can do that, fine, but Wow! me. I agree about references to VK. VK was doing fine with GE. Their solid battery and other sections helped them to crack into finals. GE quality matters. The day it doesn't we might as well exit with Don McClean and close the door. Fortunately, I believe the door remains open for most fan$. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.