The Fall of The Cavaliers

[Dale Bari]

It makes sense to me....films and Broadway shows both sell soundtracks, why not DCI?

I'm going to shock you, Mike, and agree with you. It's an opportunity to showcase the DCI product and make some money simultaneously.

But, in light of the previous poster saying that it doesn't matter if the music bores the listener to tears, the CD becomes meaningless and the rationale for marketing the CD in the first place is destroyed. No one's going to buy something they're not going to like. Telling them they're not supposed to like it (because half the package is missing) isn't going to pump up the sales either.

If the music can stand on its own, it's good music. If it needs the visual to make sense, then it's bad music. Sure, the visual can enhance the experience, much like a Broadway soundtrack is enhanced with the choreography. But, no one will buy a Broadway show CD if the music can't stand on its own.

BTW, is a little melody such a bad thing to ask for in a musical performance?

[tpt43]

It's dragging it through the mud when phantom007 says they'd be better off leaving their horns on the busses. To me that was uncalled for. These kids work thier butts off everyday for the joy of performing, not for people to bad mouth them when they aren't in a position to defend themselves. I took his post as a cut to the Cavaliers. Of course people are entitled to their opinions, but remember these guys performing are all young men, man still in high school. They play what is written for them and they play it the best they can.

If you had read my response a few posts later you would have realized that I said that ststement was a little excessive.

[Orpheus]

My personal opinion is that the Cavaliers' music programs are very effective, and well crafted. However, both in design and performance I feel that they lack passion, emotional content, inspiration, whatever you want to call it. Some music speaks to me in a very personal way on a level that the Cavies music does not. There are neat moments and I can appreciate a lot of the intellectual easter eggs that Saucedo puts in his music, but ultimately it leaves me cold. Somebody pointed out the great use of motives in their books...frankly, I find that effect trite and dull at this point. Motives are great...11 and a half minutes of motives tied together with pit breaks and dissonant chords is not great.

Yes, I exaggerated there, but the music always just sounds like it was put together according to an instruction manual. It's like the difference between a sculpture and a model airplane...I used to love putting together model airplanes, and some of the best ones are absolutely amazing, but it's not art...it lacks something.

You know what? You've expressed my feelings on the matter exactly ... and 100x better than I ever could have.

My friends and I used to joke that those Cavaliers shows were "all opener," if you know what I mean.

Edited June 29, 2006 by Orpheus

[CloudFuel]

Here little troll-troll..... <whistles>.. here little troll-troll.... SHHHHH be vewwwwy quiet.. I'm a hunting for trolls... :)

[Dale Bari]

I stopped watching DCI regularly in 2002. The product just stopped being interesting to me.

However, taking Phantom007's (did I get it right?) overall point, I would say his(?) criticism is not unknown to the Cavies. I think a lot of people would say the same things about their 1989-1992 productions: the visual is subordinated to the music, some music is pointless, it's all "more of the same" year after year.

I thoroughly enjoy those performances, but I can agree with those points regardless. To me, they took a general idea and attempted to perfect it over those four seasons. The 1992 show is a culmination of all the work done over the prior three seasons. In 1993, they started to break away from that.

Then in 2000, they, again, began with a general concept and started to perfect it. Now, this time was different because they won (tied for 1st anyway) with it right off the bat, so the perfecting in this sense was a striving for the ultimate version of this concept. I have no problem with them trying to do so, but just don't expect me to go gaga over it.

I really liked the 2000-2002 years, but then I stopped watching, so I cannot offer any opinions over the last 3-4 years. However, I do agree that I can hit "mute" on the TV and simply enjoy watching the Cavies, because to me the music irrelevant, and it's designed that way. The Cavies are the greatest marching machine on the planet from concept to performance. With the music, it's simply a clean performance. The performers do their utmost with the notes they are given. But the written music, at least on the years I know, it's ZZZZZZZZZ.

And, no matter how many times I hear it, I'm still offended: You elitist types need to stop insulting my intelligence by saying it's my fault if I find XXX corps' music boring. It's boring because IT IS! G-Cym and Meahdros (sp?) are the worst two offenders of this. You guys need to find a different argument.

I loved the original concept shows that Robert Smith wrote for Suncoast Sound and again for Magic (although "12 Seconds to the Moon" was a little tough to like at first). Phantom has introduced me to many a classical symphony and other similar pieces. Other corps put out likable music that I never heard before, so don't tell me I'm not open to different things. If a corps makes me want to switch them off, or hit "mute", that's their fault, not mine. I want to buy into what a corps is doing, but they have to give me a reason to buy it. I'm not going to close on a sale that's a bad deal for me, all in the name of "open minded-ness".

[Dale Bari]

Yes, I exaggerated there, but the music always just sounds like it was put together according to an instruction manual. It's like the difference between a sculpture and a model airplane...I used to love putting together model airplanes, and some of the best ones are absolutely amazing, but it's not art...it lacks something.

[snip]

The '05 show was a perfect example of this, in my opinion. I forget who, but somebody made a comment here that perfectly summed it up: "The cavies have a great show this year...if only they played it like they liked it."

Alan,

I have to agree with Orpheus. That was well stated, and sums up a lot of what I feel too, at least in regard to what I've seen from the Cavies during the years in question. The above paragraph I quoted is a gem and puts in a nutshell what I feel about many DCI corps over the years. For the same reason, the quote at the end of your post is on target. (Who's the original author? I must have missed that somewhere along the line.)

[cavies98]

I have been following DCI for 16 years now and I have enjoyed the Cavaliers' musical programs immensely over the past six years - just as much as any music they played in the 90s.

I respectfully disagree with your opinions.

(there's no need for you to be rude though, trolling or not)

The Cavaliers of 2006 are proving that with a few rings, and a top 2 finish in the last 5 years, it's acceptable to write music that makes no sense. Let's start this journey of poorly styled music in 2002 with everybody's favorite: Frameworks. Obviously this show made sense visually and "rocked everyone's world" but musically, I find myself lost and confused. 2003 saw another visually acceptable show with poor music choices, and I still find myself asking... Why? 2004 will give the "gods of drum corps" a break from criticizm seeing as how it's hard to musically screw up a straight forward concept like James Bond. 2005 saw a dull lifeless show trying desperately to connect with music that makes sense, but doesn't excite the senses. I'm not attacking the Cavaliers visual department, there's no sense in that. What I'm trying to say is that the Cavaliers would be just as good if they just left their horns on the busses.

Final Thoughts: Why build a machine if it's not going to do anything new?

[dbc03]

Here little troll-troll..... <whistles>.. here little troll-troll.... SHHHHH be vewwwwy quiet.. I'm a hunting for trolls... :)

I found one ^

[Matt_S]

And, no matter how many times I hear it, I'm still offended: You elitist types need to stop insulting my intelligence by saying it's my fault if I find XXX corps' music boring. It's boring because IT IS! G-Cym and Meahdros (sp?) are the worst two offenders of this. You guys need to find a different argument.

I think you misunderstand. If I say that being bored is the fault of the listener, it's not because I'm saying you don't have the intelligence to understand the music. That would be a ridiculous statement. Rather, I'm saying that some people, not all, don't like Cavaliers because it's something they won't allow themselves to enjoy. In that case, it's the fault of the listener and their bias.

There's another way to view it as the fault of the listener, as well, one that probably applies to a number of people in this thread. Music is subjective. It affects all of us in different ways, and we all have our own tastes and preferences. Even if you approach the Cavaliers with a completely open mind, you might still be bored simply because it isn't your cup of tea. In that case, is it the fault of the music or the listener? I argue that it's the fault of the listener, and their preferences, though if that's how they honestly feel then I'm fine with that. I respect that opinion, as long as it's reached in genuine effort.

Why do I not blame the music? Well, because that would imply that there's something in the music that would prevent it from being liked by anyone. Clearly, that's not the case. We've heard from many people in this thread who enjoy it, and I would count myself among them. The very shows that Phantom007 denigrated are shows that I listen to more than nearly any others. When you make comments like "It's boring because IT IS!", you can only ever speak for yourself.

I want to reiterate that my reaction to the original poster wasn't because of what he said. Rather, my reaction was because of how he said it. Everyone's entitled to their opinion, free speech and all that, but there's a difference between stating your disgareement or disapproval, versus baiting and flaming. Just read the title of this thread to see why I felt the author was flaming. Had he simply expressed his displeasure with recent Cavaliers music, I can honestly say I would have been fine with that (though I would have also expressed my opinion in disagreement). I fully understand that everyone's tastes are different. Heck, I sat next to a fellow DCPer at the Classic Countdown, and we had completely different takes on just about every show. What irks me is when someone speaks in absolutes. You sound frustrated because you think people are telling you that you have to like the Cavaliers music. By the same logic, I get frustrated when I think someone is telling me I have to hate it.

[Lance]

After scanning the last few pages of this thread, a lot of what's going on in this thread is obviously fueled by people who really really like the Cavies and people who really really don't like them, but at least it's civil. I'd like to go back to Phantom007's original post.

The Cavaliers of 2006 are proving that with a few rings, and a top 2 finish in the last 5 years, it's acceptable to write music that makes no sense. Let's start this journey of poorly styled music in 2002 with everybody's favorite: Frameworks. Obviously this show made sense visually and "rocked everyone's world" but musically, I find myself lost and confused. 2003 saw another visually acceptable show with poor music choices, and I still find myself asking... Why? 2004 will give the "gods of drum corps" a break from criticizm seeing as how it's hard to musically screw up a straight forward concept like James Bond. 2005 saw a dull lifeless show trying desperately to connect with music that makes sense, but doesn't excite the senses. I'm not attacking the Cavaliers visual department, there's no sense in that. What I'm trying to say is that the Cavaliers would be just as good if they just left their horns on the busses.

Final Thoughts: Why build a machine if it's not going to do anything new?

Except for the italicized phrases, I have no problem with the post. Heck, I even agree with those parts I italicized, but they way they're phrased is obnoxious. I think most of us who had problems with the post have problems with these same parts. And yeah, on further consideration, I was probably a bit too harsh on Phantom007. I have a tendency to be a tad sarcastic myself, after all. :)