lauren
Member
No sign of it yet Peter. Are they waiting for all the section retrospectives before putting them up?2nd Section retrospective will be appearing on 4barsrest shortly.
Thanks
No sign of it yet Peter. Are they waiting for all the section retrospectives before putting them up?2nd Section retrospective will be appearing on 4barsrest shortly.
Not heard any more since after the 2nd section results....?????Does anyone know the outcome over the registration problems with Alder Valley, and the implications this has for the 2nd Section results?
Having more than one ranking contest is an interesting idea in theory, but there's no way it will happen. Some bands only do one or two contests each year, and many of those that don't are happy with the contests they already regularly take part in. You'd have a system where bands were primarily rewarded for contest attendance.
Of course, you could try to remove the effect of rogue results by discounting each band's best and worst result of four or five, but I doubt that would be practicable.
You answered my point about some bands not playing that many contests by demeaning them.
You answered my point about your suggested system rewarding contest attendance before performance by ignoring it. Incidentally, it's exactly this that created some very strange local gradings in Wales (not national gradings, as the area qualifiers are run separately to the Welsh local contests).
Such a system would not reward "competing regularly at a high standard", it would reward "competing regularly". These are not the same thing at all..
Of course, there are several other problems, such as the local contest areas (e.g. SCABA) not being coincident with the London and Southern Counties Region for the areas, but these are less important.
Not heard any more since after the 2nd section results....?????
2) Open adjudication is not a good thing as being in a box means you use the one sense (your ears).
The regional committees exist to fulfil one purpose and one purpose only: to provide bands to the finals.Why on earth are there 2 different bodies dealing with the SE, with different boundries yet both running competitions. Perhaps another place where things can be streamlined to simplfy things.
G
I agree with a lot of what you said however I will ask another question. When open adjudication is perfectly fine for Cardiff Singer of the World, BBC Young Musician of the Year, Llangollen Eisteddfod Choir of Choirs and in fact every major major competition I can think of, why are brass bands so "special" to think they either need, or benefit from closed adjudication? Why is it that judges of all these other competitions can be classed as impartial yet brass band judges can't.
I also think the sooner we get away from just brass band people judging brass band competitions and accept neutral judges the better. A panel of 3 professional musicians not related to brass banding would certainly put the cat amongst the pidgeons! No more awarding points for that "brass band sound" in a "me too" fasion. Concentrate properly on the interpretation and musicianship and not everyone trying to sound like Dyke et al. Before you jump down my throat no I'm not saying Dyke or anyone else are bad/nasty/poor/have a bad sound. I'm just suggesting there is fixation on getting a "sound" which people in brass banding aspire to which is perpetuated by the judges comments in a nasty little cycle. This means if you don't have that sound, you don't win and to hell with your interpretation or musicianship - some say Zone-1 suffer from it pretty badly in the London area)
G
Had no confirmation on any facts but there was one band in the 2nd section that was said to have registrations that were being investigated by the committee. On the day the buzz that was going round that it was Alder Valley (the winning band) but I know nothing more as yet.what was the rumour on this then?
Not in the slightest. I think everyone would agrees that bands can be ranked better on the basis of more performances in a league system. However, you describe a situation where bands who wish to be ranked would be forced to do at least three and preferably four specific contests each year. The restrictions on bands caused by implementing such a system would far outweigh the benefits for pretty much everyone.No, I don't believe I did you're just missing the point I think.
Let me explain the system:Your statement does raise another question though. Why on earth are there 2 different bodies dealing with the SE, with different boundries yet both running competitions. Perhaps another place where things can be streamlined to simplfy things.
I am in possession of an email from a member of the L&SC team, dated 2006, informing that following some very strange decisions and 'nasty comments' from David Horsfield back in the 1st Section in 2006 he would NOT be adjudicating in the L&SC for a long time to come! Sadly that didnt last long!
I noticed David Read in attendance at most sections over the weekend, would be interesting to hear what he thought of the results. Bands should definitily push for "two in the box" from next year.
Does anyone know the outcome over the registration problems with Alder Valley, and the implications this has for the 2nd Section results?
Dear Dirty Xsara
Firstly why not identify yourself, it may add credence to your claim re the email.
Secondly remember that the L & SC committeee at very short notice had to find an adjudicator for the 1st & Champ section when Robert Childs became unavailable. We do not know that either Mr Horsfield was first choice or even the only choice.
I agree with a lot of what you said however I will ask another question. When open adjudication is perfectly fine for Cardiff Singer of the World, BBC Young Musician of the Year, Llangollen Eisteddfod Choir of Choirs and in fact every major major competition I can think of, why are brass bands so "special" to think they either need, or benefit from closed adjudication? Why is it that judges of all these other competitions can be classed as impartial yet brass band judges can't.
I also think the sooner we get away from just brass band people judging brass band competitions and accept neutral judges the better. A panel of 3 professional musicians not related to brass banding would certainly put the cat amongst the pidgeons! No more awarding points for that "brass band sound" in a "me too" fasion. Concentrate properly on the interpretation and musicianship and not everyone trying to sound like Dyke et al. Before you jump down my throat no I'm not saying Dyke or anyone else are bad/nasty/poor/have a bad sound. I'm just suggesting there is fixation on getting a "sound" which people in brass banding aspire to which is perpetuated by the judges comments in a nasty little cycle. This means if you don't have that sound, you don't win and to hell with your interpretation or musicianship - some say Zone-1 suffer from it pretty badly in the London area)
G
The 4br retrospectives are now up - some interesting views on performances there!
under articlesAre they? I still see just the results page!