Paddy's Midlands Area - 2013

tubafran

Active Member
3rd section ups - ICCBB and Arrow Valley - 4 down on ties Stourport, West Mercia, Fairfield Buxton and WEM (sorry Roger) - totally unofficial
 

subtlevib

Member
Great 2nd section today, one outstanding performance (well done Bilton), several very good performances.
Considering the difficulty of the piece, I was surprised (and disappointed) to see several M.Ds treat it as a day directing traffic! The importance of leadership was reflected in the winning performance. David Stowell teased every ounce of musicality out of his band, in a masterclass of conducting.
Thanks for this, on behalf of Bilton Silver, Mark. Appreciate your comments and agree re David Stowell. Every rehearsal an absolute musical pleasure - one of the most enjoyable test piece journeys I've had in recent years.
We expect to move up to Section 1 from Jan - a whole new ball game!
 

Brian

Member
Paddy's Midland area-2013

My calculations have Cleobury and Warwick Uni up from 4th - again unofficial
Don't forget, that it is likely 4 are being relegated....unofficially ofc
so 4 could be going up, maybe, possibly, could be
 

tubafran

Active Member
Don't forget, that it is likely 4 are being relegated....unofficially ofc
so 4 could be going up, maybe, possibly, could be
Back to square one on numbers?
If my calcs are correct then it would appear so (total of 4 went up to 3rd section in 2012) - though not sure how extra numbers get a promotion benefit from 4th due to some un-lucky ties in the 3rd section - perhaps they have more reason to stay up?

Kapitol rules aren't like the Pirate Code you know ("more sort of a guide line - oh aaaah)
 

MoominDave

Well-Known Member
4BR have both University of Warwick and Moulton '77 playing 17th out of 17 in the 4th section, while missing any band drawing 16. So presumably these two bands (who placed 4th and 3rd respectively) finished the section - but which order did they play in? Who played last?
 

Glamorgan

New Member
4BR have both University of Warwick and Moulton '77 playing 17th out of 17 in the 4th section, while missing any band drawing 16. So presumably these two bands (who placed 4th and 3rd respectively) finished the section - but which order did they play in? Who played last?
As in the order on the day? Warwick Uni were drawn 16th.
 

marksmith

Active Member
One thing that is most definitely worthy of mention from Sunday, is the excellent organisation.
I did not get to the school hall but the slick change-over of bands at the Civic Centre was greatly appreciated by all.
Even the Championship section bands were 'encouraged' to set-up as swiftly as possible, well within any 4 minute expectation.
Lesley Bentley, Dave Newman and John Slater, all deserve personal recognition for their work. Well done to the Midlands Regional Committee.
 

rutty

Active Member
One thing that is most definitely worthy of mention from Sunday, is the excellent organisation.
I did not get to the school hall but the slick change-over of bands at the Civic Centre was greatly appreciated by all.
Even the Championship section bands were 'encouraged' to set-up as swiftly as possible, well within any 4 minute expectation.
Lesley Bentley, Dave Newman and John Slater, all deserve personal recognition for their work. Well done to the Midlands Regional Committee.
I was going to say the same thing. Superbly organised. Thanks all :)
 

BarneyEuph

Member
One thing that is most definitely worthy of mention from Sunday, is the excellent organisation.
I did not get to the school hall but the slick change-over of bands at the Civic Centre was greatly appreciated by all.
Even the Championship section bands were 'encouraged' to set-up as swiftly as possible, well within any 4 minute expectation.
Lesley Bentley, Dave Newman and John Slater, all deserve personal recognition for their work. Well done to the Midlands Regional Committee.
Well done. Very well organised.
 
The adjuicators were a little critical of the choice of music for this section, suggesting that it was not pleasant to hear players struggling.
The 'challenge' of the music is surely what it is all about? I enjoyed listening to all 12 bands. Well done all.
No. I would like to see test pieces selected with a bit more intelligence than "lets give them a really hard one and see what happens". Seeing who can play a comparatively easier piece extremely well would be a better test, seeing who really is getting those fundamentals right. Otherwise it becomes a test of who handles stress better, nothing to to with the music at all. What a shame.
 

MoominDave

Well-Known Member
Hmm, there's positives and negatives to both sides. Setting a rock hard test can be demoralising for the weaker bands in a section (while of course exciting the stronger bands and those in the weaker bands who enjoy a challenge) but does a comparatively good job of sorting out the placings all the way down the field. Setting a piece that can be played extremely well by several of the bands in a section is musically fulfilling in a different way, but always produces some odd results that leave a bad taste in the mouth.

For my money setting a piece that is too hard is notably less of a sin than setting a piece that is too easy. But given the seeming impossibility of picking a piece is 'just right', one or the other sin must be settled for. Maybe two years too hard, then one year too easy is not a bad recipe.
 
The organisation of the Midlands was excellent and certainly the Fourth section door steward (into the hall) was very friendly and had a great, relaxing attitude. The only disappointment is around the website and grading tables as to date we are still showing 2012 band results and grading tables. I know the tables would be preliminary at this stage but if we could at least see the starting point (with 2010 removed) at the start of the contest that would be great!
 

iancwilx

Well-Known Member
Hmm, there's positives and negatives to both sides. Setting a rock hard test can be demoralising for the weaker bands in a section (while of course exciting the stronger bands and those in the weaker bands who enjoy a challenge) but does a comparatively good job of sorting out the placings all the way down the field. Setting a piece that can be played extremely well by several of the bands in a section is musically fulfilling in a different way, but always produces some odd results that leave a bad taste in the mouth.
For my money setting a piece that is too hard is notably less of a sin than setting a piece that is too easy. But given the seeming impossibility of picking a piece is 'just right', one or the other sin must be settled for. Maybe two years too hard, then one year too easy is not a bad recipe.
I was just thinking that it might be an idea to set a choice of two test pieces for each of the lower sections, a tough one, and one not quite as tough and bands could choose which one to play. To my mind it is quite feasible that a band playing the easier piece well, could beat a band playing the harder piece scrappily ~ Just a thought.

~ Mr Wilx
 

MoominDave

Well-Known Member
Not a bad idea at all. Set pieces for instrumental grades do this - a set of pieces covering a spectrum of skills that allows a teacher to pick pieces that suit the pupil, to some extent.

But people want more certainty from the areas, not less, and making it partially own choice would make results a bit more random. I suspect people wouldn't go for it because of that. But I'd love to be proved wrong.
 
If you're going down the more choice route, a shorter set piece plus another from a shortlist could be another option, the shortlist covering a variety of difficulty levels. In my electric organ contesting days this was the format for most competitions.
 
Top