raphael18 Posted August 6, 2006 Share Posted August 6, 2006 I understand the importance of visual repetoire, but it is my understanding that the judges reward how well you do what you are given. If, PR is nailing what they have - for an example just watch the feet on the Season Pass video (very little phasing in what PR is doing, a great deal in what Cavs are doing). I may be showing my bias, but to me - if you are going to run around that is your choice, and your risk. I have been beat by corps (and bands for that matter) that had much eassier drill, because they were much cleanner, then again, who hasn't? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom&Phitch Posted August 6, 2006 Author Share Posted August 6, 2006 But does that mean each new writer has a completely different style? Look at the Cavies. They began their visual revolution before Gaines was in charge. When you watch a 90s Cavies show, you can see it starting to look like it does now. but the difference is gaines learned to write drill from and studied under Steve Brubaker. he's taking steves idea and running with it, so its not new drill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morgoth Bauglir Posted August 6, 2006 Share Posted August 6, 2006 Well they reward both "what" and "how" equally I believe. And with good reason. Making either execution or composition worth more than the other gives staffs incentive to ignore one in favor of the other. If composition were worth more, drill would be crazy for everyone, but would look like crap. And if execution were more valuable, corps would just be performing the #### out of easy boring drill. Neither situation is that appealing to me. By having both equal, it forces corps to find a balance between creating entertaining shows, but still having a standard of excellence to adhere to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morgoth Bauglir Posted August 6, 2006 Share Posted August 6, 2006 but the difference is gaines learned to write drill from and studied under Steve Brubaker. he's taking steves idea and running with it, so its not new drill. That's what I am saying. Even with new drill writers, PR has stayed within the confines of design they have had for years. Each new drill writer has seemingly based his methods and designs off of the past. The Cavies have done the same thing, but with enough change and progress to keep things interesting. I feel that PR might need to break their mold if they are to really jump ahead and be a real visual contender. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom&Phitch Posted August 6, 2006 Author Share Posted August 6, 2006 That's what I am saying. Even with new drill writers, PR has stayed within the confines of design they have had for years. Each new drill writer has seemingly based his methods and designs off of the past. The Cavies have done the same thing, but with enough change and progress to keep things interesting. I feel that PR might need to break their mold if they are to really jump ahead and be a real visual contender. sorry, but i severly disagree. there are clear differences when it comes to PRs drills vs. who the drill writer was. and its not visual design thats keeping them from being a visual contender, its execution. in my book they already are a visual contender, they proved that last year when they tied the cavaliers in visual. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LAMystreaux Posted August 6, 2006 Share Posted August 6, 2006 sorry, but i severly disagree. there are clear differences when it comes to PRs drills vs. who the drill writer was. and its not visual design thats keeping them from being a visual contender, its execution. in my book they already are a visual contender, they proved that last year when they tied the cavaliers in visual. I highly disagree that it is only execution. 2003 is a great example of an amazing music book and a mediocre visual program. . .and yes, some execution issues as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom&Phitch Posted August 6, 2006 Author Share Posted August 6, 2006 I highly disagree that it is only execution. 2003 is a great example of an amazing music book and a mediocre visual program. . .and yes, some execution issues as well. reading comprehension... i said visual contender. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WOOHOO Posted August 6, 2006 Share Posted August 6, 2006 sorry, but i severly disagree. there are clear differences when it comes to PRs drills vs. who the drill writer was. and its not visual design thats keeping them from being a visual contender, its execution. in my book they already are a visual contender, they proved that last year when they tied the cavaliers in visual. They won visual performance at quarterfinals last year, and beat Cavies in that field at finals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom&Phitch Posted August 6, 2006 Author Share Posted August 6, 2006 They won visual performance at quarterfinals last year, and beat Cavies in that field at finals. i was speaking mostly about this year in that aspect, but it can still be applied to other areas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WOOHOO Posted August 6, 2006 Share Posted August 6, 2006 i was speaking mostly about this year in that aspect, but it can still be applied to other areas. Oh, OK. 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.