Who would love the Cadets again?

[Fincis]

Couple of short rants real quick.

Just so everyone knows, not all shows are programmed for crowd response. Cadets 2005 for example is a much more sophisticated and better performed show what 2003 and got significantly less crowd reaction. The show was designed to get different effects. An example is at the end of "Machine" the horns and drums don't finish out the phrase at the end of the hit section. They could've gotten huge crowd response but chose to take a different path on purpose and play a space chord that decrescendos into the next phrase. Crowd response is not the mark of a great show. If you want another example look at Cavaliers 2002. Only peep out of the audience during that show was in fight club. It was more of an awe effect than crowd response.

I still consider fair-weather fans fans indeed. Granted, they are not fans I want to hang around, but they are fans. What I don't consider a fan is someone who claims to love a corps but is THE most vocal person about how much they hate them. If those are the same in your (collective) mind then forget what I just wrote. Hrothgar, I fully appreciate the fact that you love The Cadets shows of the past and I'm full aware that you tend to exagerate. Examples like Every Cadets show pre-2003 is a masterpiece and 2006 is the most (insert as many horrible adjectives in here as possible) show I've ever seen. It may well be out of love that you are like this, but to me and I'm sure many others, when we think of someone who is a fan of The Cadets you are absolutely THE last person we would throw on the list, imo.

[ChicagoFan]

I saw my first show in June 2005.

You saw your first show in 2005, yet somehow you're able to speak with certainity about shows and audience reaction from the 1980s - 90s. I know you will claim you've viewed said shows on DVD or via other recorded media but I would point out that such reproductions are not accurate or reliable indicators of the shows themselves, let alone something as elusive and subjective as audience reaction.

Sometimes it's best to stick with what you know.

Edited October 11, 2006 by ChicagoFan

[Hrothgar15]

Granted, they are not fans I want to hang around, but they are fans. What I don't consider a fan is someone who claims to love a corps but is THE most vocal person about how much they hate them.

I never ONCE said I hated the Cadets. I can be a huge fan of a corps and absolutely despise a show they put out. If I can't do that, then I think you and I have differing definitions of what the word "fan" means.

Examples like Every Cadets show pre-2003 is a masterpiece and 2006 is the most (insert as many horrible adjectives in here as possible) show I've ever seen.

I'm not exaggerating with these claims. I feel this way. I'm pretty sure I know how I feel.

It may well be out of love that you are like this, but to me and I'm sure many others, when we think of someone who is a fan of The Cadets you are absolutely THE last person we would throw on the list, imo.

Believe me, if I hadn't thought that what the Cadets did for so many years was so amazing, I wouldn't be nearly as vocal about the 2006 show. Do you remember me saying anything about BD in 2005? No, because I wasn't a fan of them back then.

You saw your first show in 2005, yet somehow you're able to speak with certainity about shows and audience reaction from the 1980s - 90s. I know you will claim you've viewed said shows on DVD or via other recorded media but I would point out that such reproductions are not accurate or reliable indicators of the shows themselves, let alone something as elusive and subjective as audience reaction.

I'm sorry, but there's no denying that the actual audience reaction at finals at the end of the Cadets' 2006 performance was significantly lower than that of the other top 4 corps, as well as that of many of the corps' past performances. This is fact.

Realize I'm not trying to antagonize anyone here, so please don't take it as that.

Edited October 11, 2006 by Hrothgar15

[ChicagoFan]

I'm sorry, but there's no denying that the actual audience reaction at finals at the end of the Cadets' 2006 performance was significantly lower than that of the other top 4 corps, as well as that of many of the corps' past performances.

Ah ha...now you're catching on. To claim that the reaction to the Cadets at finals in 2006 was somewhat less than that accorded to the other top 4 corps is legitimate. Why? Because you were at the event and this is what you observed to be true (though others would have a different opinion). However, to claim, as you did several pages ago, that the crowd reaction in 2006 was significantly less than it was in the 80's and 90s is suspect. You were not at performances during that time period (you weren't even born in the 80s) and, therefore, have no means by which to evaluate crowd reaction and/or compare it to that from 2006.

It's always dangerous to make blanket statements, particularly when you lack concrete evidence, or even experience, with which to support your suppositions. Your enthusiasm for drum corps is admirable but it is often negated by your over-zealous attempts to ingratiate yourself into this community. As I mentioned in an earlier post, stick with what you know.

Edited October 11, 2006 by ChicagoFan

[zackiedude]

Not every is entertained by balls to the walls playing year in and year out. I like intricately designed shows, shows that make you think, and shows that you don't quite understand at face value. We all have our own tastes and for you to claim that Cadets this year weren't entertaining is wrong. I was EXTREMELY entertained and they were my favorite corps to watch this summer.

That's just how art goes.

[Hrothgar15]

You were not at performances during that time period (you weren't even born in the 80s) and, therefore, have no means by which to evaluate crowd reaction and/or compare it to that from 2006.

Oh really?

The following chart represents the degree of crowd reaction in the Cadets 2000 show (which, by the way, is my favorite show of all time) compared to the Cadets 2006 show. Since the recordings are at different volume levels, I'll compare a portion of the show that includes the entire hornline playing, to the audience response at the end of the show, for each show.

For Cadets 2000, the entire hornline plays during the beginning push:

Here is the audience response at the end of the show. Note the corps is not playing a note.

For the 2006 show, the entire hornline plays at the end of the opener:

And now the audience reaction at the end of the show:

Viewing Cadets 2000 side-by-side (note the audience is actually LOUDER than the full hornline playing at triple-forte):

and Cadets 2006 side-by-side

it is clear that the audience reaction to the 2000 show was exponentially higher than that of the 2006 show.

Now before you say, "Just because the audience didn't clap and cheer as much at the end, doesn't mean they didn't like or were as entertained by the show as much," think about how stupid that sounds.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, stick with what you know.

Thanks for telling me what I can and can't do. I'll continue posting whatever I'd like, so long as it abides by the Terms of Service.

[thePerfectbuzz]

Guess what? I'm a firm believer that every drum corps show should have a primary purpose to entertain the crowd. Maybe not "making them go crazy," because a crowd can be entertained in many different ways.

That's how I feel, and that's what I believe.

No, the Cadets are not my personal entertainment group, but there are many, many drum corps fans who feel the same way I do (though not to this extreme).

this is where you need to keep that 'opinion' just your opinion and stop beating it into everyone else over and over. We got you...i got you....the Cadets got you....your all about the crowd reaction, not everyone cares. Sure there will be a few other enthusiasts that will agree with you on your opinion, but as SCdrumcorpsfan said...the more you ramble on and run out of different methods to state the same argument, the more immature you begin to sound.

to go with the thread and reply to your theory about crowd reaction...your generalizing what 'entertaining' the crowd is. you dont have to entertain the masses to entertain the 'crowd'. The Cadets show designer (or at least the main program coordinator for the 05 and 06 productions, Marc Sylvestor) is a very artistic person. He has a very creative mind and chooses to express himself. there are many great artists that create masterpieces that are in museums, art displays, and other exhibits throughout the world. but much of this art does not entertain the whole 'crowd' because of this MTV generation we live in...which is fine. That doesnt keep artists from expressing their own work....sure they want people to enjoy their products (such as Im sure the Cadets do) but they're not going to just create certain works of art just so they get a majority approval. that doesnt mean certain pieces arent great!! there are a lot of great pieces that get criticized and hated upon based off people's opinions....which in some way is in my 'opinion' what makes a great piece of 'art' (in this case a drum corps show). Its something that can be discussed over and over, probably for years to come, with much contraversy...it almost makes the work more intellectual that way, because its something that goes beyond the initial viewing.

Marc Sylvestor was simply being an artist like Picaso, Michelangelo, Leonardo, etc...only he was expressing himself not on a canvas but on a football field. He was using the Cadets' hornline, drum line, and colorguard as his colors. Jay Bocook wrote a beautiful music book and Jeff Sacktig did a great job writing demanding and effective drill to accompany the music. but Mr. Sylvestor took the tools he had and ran with it....making a storyline and using characters and wanting a vocalist...is this all how you would make your show?! No...but your not the artist here...Marc Sylvestor is.... and I personally dont think him and the 2006 Cadets did a bad job....but my opinion isnt a fact, its just an opinion. Picaso didnt create his unorthodox art in needing everyone's approval, he was just simply expressing himself.

just my .02

[Fincis]

Now before you say, "Just because the audience didn't clap and cheer as much at the end, doesn't mean they didn't like or were as entertained by the show as much," think about how stupid that sounds.

Talk about calling the kettle black. Cadets 2000 is one example. Crowd reaction isn't everything. Like I said earlier if you watch and listen to Cavaliers 2002, they have one of the smallest crowd reactions I can remember, with the exception of Fight Club. I never saw it live, but I had the chance to see it at the theatres for the Cinecast and it was the same reaction, crickets. However, that show appeals in a different way. They were so clean and you could help but watch in awe at what they were doing. It wasn't a show programmed for crowd response, same thing with Cadets 2005.

*Edited for restraining myself slightly and the point of it being ineffective anyways.*

Edited October 11, 2006 by Fincis

[jake_the_hydra]

it is clear that the audience reaction to the 2000 show was exponentially higher than that of the 2006 show.

I think we're all pretty shocked about that.

[MikeD]

I'm sorry, but there's no denying that the actual audience reaction at finals at the end of the Cadets' 2006 performance was significantly lower than that of the other top 4 corps, as well as that of many of the corps' past performances. This is fact.

Well, actually it can b e denied, but let's for a moment assume it is true....

So what?

Shows are designed, as others have said, to generate all sorts of reactions from the audience. It's certainly not "the loudest one wins" all the time.