BFBB National Survey

Discussion in 'The Rehearsal Room' started by brassneck, Oct 30, 2004.

  1. brassneck

    brassneck Active Member

    4barsrest Link:- http://www.4barsrest.com/news/detail.asp?id=2704

    ... Welcome and much needed input that will be representative of all bands in the UK, but I feel that the adjudication issue doesn't go far enough. Why must the prize money be reduced to hire an additional judge? The conditions of qualifying should be the same, regardless, for all areas in this important weekend of contesting. The advance specification of criteria is questionable as well. It is likely that the goals required/stated would be based on common sense and, in turn, maybe not much use as targets (unless metronome adherence is specified). I was hoping that some option (as I have strongly argued before) for the team of adjudicators to analyse their score-reading at a conference or workshop & agree on criteria would be a more sensible approach. This would reduce the subjective 'on the day' decisions that we have been accustomed to up until now & allow a heirarchical rule structure that can be followed by all judges. What if one judge fell seriously ill during a contest and couldn't continue? If another stood in to finish the job, could that person be relied on to give continuity? Very unlikely. That can only be done if all the panel had preset guides. In my opinion, this is a much fairer way of organising judging at such an important contest and could do away with closed adjudication too and the problems associated with what sound is masked by the box. My gripe over with :x
     
  2. theMouthPiece Related Searches

    Find more discussions like this one
    Link
    adjudicators
    same
    conditions
    way
  3. lewis

    lewis Member

    I do understand your idea of the adjudicators giving a conference but wouldn't that then just portray a 'winning formula'? So many bands and players are already petrified of spliting notes but to add the thought of sections having to be played at rigid tempos and forced musicality in solos as well could be the death of any enjoyment. I really think that sometimes the banding world forgets to look at how the music is intended, a safety first issue maybe? How about an adjudicator that isn't a brass player? Just a suggestion.
    I do completely agree with taking money out of the pot for another adjudicator though, the prize money is often so bad anyway (take the areas for expample) that another adjudicator would make the prize winnings nothing.
    Good post though, food for thought.
     
  4. brassneck

    brassneck Active Member

    I'm afraid, Lewis, that's the survey's option ... not mine! ("Should adjudicators specify in advance what they are looking for?"). I would rather not have that situation. All I want is the pool of adjudicators to get together in advance of the contests to discuss and agree what they will be judging on. That they will have the same parameters and criteria will mean an even playing field for all competing bands, which should include fresh ideas in reading. Too often have I (and many others) have been frustrated when certain individuals have been named for a contest, knowing that things may have to be re-worked to suit that person's taste, not necessarily helping the musical interpretation. I have always been saddened when bands lose out on promotion/relegation because of one, and only one, person's view on the day (which might differ from adjudicators in other areas!).
     
  5. lewis

    lewis Member

    I have openlyviewed my opinions on 4bars regarding the adjudicators for the areas, and I agree it is always frustating when going into a contest you stand less than a fair chance because of who is sat in the box. But! Will having another adjudicator there as well always sort this problme out? I think what I was trying to say (but failed miserably) is that maybe they should be some new faces in the box. I was delighted to see that Chris Wormald was adjudicating at Pontins today but Malcolm Brownbill and David Read again? Read's prize at the nationals should have well done 15 nationals, 10 in a row and that's your lot!

    I think in some ways I am agreeing with you but I do think that although adjudicators specifying what they want before a contest sounds good in theiry in practise it'll take what little musicality that is left in banding away.
     
  6. brassneck

    brassneck Active Member

    Another factor to consider when two or more adjudicators sit in the same box is that usually there are situations where one dominates the proceedings and final decision-making, thus affecting results. This, surely, is not in the interest of fair play if a person is muted from giving his own opinion. I would have the judges in separate positions to avoid this happening. If my idea had to be taken on, there would be no problem with open adjudication if all were judging on a preset, agreed formula to differentiate performances and mark accordingly.
     

Share This Page