Discussion in 'The Adjudicators' Comments' started by Mesmerist, Mar 12, 2017.
How did it go Euphonium lite?
In the LSC area, two bands from the same village but in different sections both got to go to Cheltenham, now that must be a little unusual?
Speaking of which, to answer the subject question, yes, we are very happy with our result this year. And, so I suspect, are Oxford Cherwell...
2 bands from the same organisation did it too - Regent Brass and Regent Community Brass
Fab result for Kidlington, Moomin.... and yes, we're pleased with our result too!
Not great. We played ok-ish but came 2nd bottom. Lots of positives from the recording TBH and whilst I was annoyed at the result at first that's contesting. On to the next one.....
I have since heard from someone I trust who listened to nearly all of the 4th section Midland bands and said it was not 4BR who got it completely wrong but the judges!
Just depends what the judges priorities are when they're listening - sometimes they seem to be preoccupied with one of the "basics" specifically (intonation, tightness in ensemble, unforced errors, etc) and sometimes they're looking at things like tempi or dynamics (and whether bands can play the piece at written markings or not) or at interpretation... etcetcetc.
The comments from the stage often seem to be something of a mish-mash of several points - but if they're looking at a specific area and someone in the crowd is just going on their feelings/judgement of which performances they felt held together best as a whole, there's going to be a disconnect... and lets bear in mind that 4BR/Bandsman/etc are often in the latter camp and that's how you'd want it.
What makes particular people and/or particular bands happy with their result?
Chatting to a few people they weren't particularly unhappy with their results despite not being in the first three of their section - that's not to say that winning wouldn't have brought some celebration or the process of contest preparation and performance was not taken seriously. The reason that they contest is to a degree developmental (challenges the Band), to a degree social ('social' time away with their Band and a chance to meet fiends who play in other bands) and to a degree selective (for their own various reasons they enjoy playing in a band of section 'x' level). The thought of continued rehearsals of their test piece and the expense of going to Cheltenham or London didn't appeal much and hence a middle ranking result was perfectly acceptable - a good result for them as developmental and social aims were met and their Band confirmed as section 'x' standard - though obviously not to be openly described as such.
Edit. What about those bands that seemed to be heading for relegation but who managed a decent enough result to stave-off that disaster. Though you might not chose to publicise your position surely that's a happy result?
Afraid not. Like it or not the men in the box got it right on the day because it was their decision and their decision only.
How dare they ???!!!
Just out of interest who didn't your trusted friend hear and who would he/she have placed?
I know from the adjudicators comments that it was the correct and different styles for each of the variations that they were wanting, and playing at the correct tempos. They specifically mentioned the marches - one was scored to be played quicker than the other, and some bands didn't do that. Guess they were the bands that didn't fare so well.
Not unhappy with our bands placing but curious about the adjudication.
Following the various Area's most Adjudicators said keep it simple, follow the Score, Tempo's etc. It's an old piece (Pageantry) but still a test for Bands as long as you keep it near Howell's original etc.
But in Stevenage they said "If you want to try something different it's OK by us."
A couple of years previously at Leicester Contest one of these Adjudicators criticized our selection of "Variations on a Ninth" as being outdated and past it, my point being if he/they don't like "Old test pieces" why take the Job
He specifically said the band who came last should have come first!
Separate names with a comma.