Morgoth Bauglir Posted May 26, 2006 Share Posted May 26, 2006 (edited) Not at all. My point was, just because you and I think amps affect balance doesn't mean amps affect scores. You actually emphasized that point when you said that there have been no negative consequences, scorewise, for balance problems resulting from amps. If A=B and B=C, than A=C. If Amps affect Balance, and Balance affects Scores, than Amps affect Scores. editied for churlishness. Edited May 26, 2006 by G-Cym Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Posted May 26, 2006 Share Posted May 26, 2006 Nevermind, not worth being talked down to. I'd like to hear the impact of amps on scores, specifically which captions they do or do not affect, from DCI. Until then... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bawker Posted May 26, 2006 Share Posted May 26, 2006 I'd like to hear the impact of amps on scores, specifically which captions they do or do not affect, from DCI. Until then... I think we all want to hear that. It seems its easier to leave it undefined, for whatever reason the judging community has decided. Maybe it's too much of a political issue. Dunno. Anyone know how it's figured into the equation in other circuits (BOA, etc)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Posted May 26, 2006 Share Posted May 26, 2006 Probably has something to do with the distributive property from GCym's 7th grade class. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted May 26, 2006 Share Posted May 26, 2006 If a judge takes off a tenth of a point for bad balance from amping, are you going to be able to tell the difference between what would have been a 15.2 and is now a 15.1? 15.0? How much do you expect we should see be counted off for distortion or overbalance? How are you really so sure that amp distortion and overbalance aren't being considered in the score? if it is a show long issue, a tenth is a gift. i'm not saying kill em, but a tenth for an 11 minute issue is merry friggen Xmas. the sheets havent changed to reflect it, and let's face it, no one has ever come out and said that amps are considered good or bad on the sheets...in essence they are this big null and void everyone tap dances around. now if judge a came out one night and said "your pit was way overbalanced and it afected your score a lot", and it cost someone a placement, esp at a big show, guarantee 1 of 2 things would happen if not both: it'd become public that judge would be history. no one's got a big enough set to take a stand Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted May 26, 2006 Share Posted May 26, 2006 Not at all. My point was, just because you and I think amps affect balance doesn't mean amps affect scores. You actually emphasized that point when you said that there seems to have been no negative consequences, scorewise, for balance problems resulting from amps. Or are you trying to say that if a corps uses amps, it gives them more potential to get a score boost because the judges are of the mentality that only points can be awarded for amp use, thereby putting the GMen at a disadvantage for not using them? Very confusing to try to follow what the point of this discussion is, exactly. i'm saying if you're gonna give credit if it help, you should take it away when it causes issues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted May 26, 2006 Share Posted May 26, 2006 I think we all want to hear that.It seems its easier to leave it undefined, for whatever reason the judging community has decided. Maybe it's too much of a political issue. Dunno. Anyone know how it's figured into the equation in other circuits (BOA, etc)? i know it has in TOB...kept a program from acheiving 2 10's upstairs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bawker Posted May 26, 2006 Share Posted May 26, 2006 i know it has in TOB...kept a program from acheiving 2 10's upstairs How so? Specifically in regards to how its looked at on the sheets, I mean. Surely, DCI judges will have a similar mindset. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted May 26, 2006 Share Posted May 26, 2006 well the electronics had 2 bars where they were it in the closer, and the keys were apparently touch sensitive, and the kids wailed on them....like totally loud, ruined the effect. the judge said they were on their way to 10's in both boxes, but the overly loud keyboards ruind the moment so to speak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tekneek Posted May 26, 2006 Author Share Posted May 26, 2006 (edited) Interesting points made by a lot of people here. I was hoping to be able to find some good discussion and I appreciate the effort of those who participated. The obvious competitive disadvantage is having to teach everyone (pretty much) how to play a G bugle when they may walk in off the street knowing quite a bit about the Bb horns. That's instruction time that another corps may already be spending on music/drill at some point. If the purpose of the amped pit is to improve the technical performance quality, then that would certainly be considered by the judges and a corps without that benefit has to work a little harder to both project to the box AND play with competitive technique. That's just my take on it. The competitive demands of the activity will pretty much require that you march with these 'improvements' or face extinction after finishing 15th or lower for many years and watch funding/membership dry up. Few, if any, of these types of changes will not be exploited by the top corps which will require any lower corps wishing to challenge them to either spend the money or work twice as hard to achieve a comparable result. Edited May 26, 2006 by Tekneek 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.