Like the audience, judges are human, too. After sitting all day seeing the same show over and over they are going to be grateful to see something new and different. Now on occasion there will be a judge or panel that is resistant to anything other than what they've defined show choir to be. Just do your show at such a high level that it cannot be denied. And only after your singing is consistently top notch. Nothing irritates me more than seeing a choir trying to do too much when they don't even have the basics down.
I'll be honest, I'm getting majorly bored by most show choir. Very few groups get me excited now, and it's usually because I've never seen them before. Wheaton is one of those groups that always has an exciting show but it doesn't have to be out of the box to be exciting. When 10 out of the 15 groups at a competition are choreographed by April or Damon, things get really boring. I haven't really seen anything (from the little that I've seen) that gets me excited. The entire time I was at Mt. Zion I was just sort of bored when it wasn't Wheaton or parts of Buffalo Grove's show because everything just looks the same. I hardly even remember Crete-Monee's show other than their closer looked and sounded like it'd been done better before. C'mon people, start getting exciting!
that's why most things done by Stephen Todd (aka riverside co.) are pure brilliance. much more creative than anyone else. april is creative just has a TON of big name groups so it gets monotonous. dwight is usually just so easy. but if it's a good group (aka wheaton) they can whip out other aspects of excellence and creativity.
as with pushing boundaries vs. catering the score sheet....it seems like riverside company[slash stephen] (even if not the MOST innovative all the time) balances this well; trying to have one really unique/boundary-pushing thing in every show but still keeping a lot of things that cater to the judging.
I'll be honest, I'm getting majorly bored by most show choir. Very few groups get me excited now, and it's usually because I've never seen them before. Wheaton is one of those groups that always has an exciting show but it doesn't have to be out of the box to be exciting. When 10 out of the 15 groups at a competition are choreographed by April or Damon, things get really boring. I haven't really seen anything (from the little that I've seen) that gets me excited. The entire time I was at Mt. Zion I was just sort of bored when it wasn't Wheaton or parts of Buffalo Grove's show because everything just looks the same. I hardly even remember Crete-Monee's show other than their closer looked and sounded like it'd been done better before. C'mon people, start getting exciting!
I do find it interesting, though, that you say "there is a difference between doing well and placing well that people are forgetting about, and shows simply cater to the score sheet nowadays," but then you go on to say "I know what scores well and I would give groups shows that do score well." It seems a bit confusing to me. Are you criticizing the groups who do play to the scoresheet, or are you saying that's what everyone should be doing?
Good discussion.
I guess I included that in my part of the discussion because for sure I would cater to the scoresheet while staying true to my vision. I would want my groups to place the best they can because not making finals and not placing is no fun and it makes the performers feel poorly about themselves, even if they did have a great performance. It's kinda the battle that I have inside daily. I want to have an innovative show that is based on my creative vision without caring about how it will score, but at the same time I want to make sure it does score well because in the long term building of a program who wants to be in a program that doesn't do well? So when I plan out shows to do I have to think what will score highly as well as what will satisfy myself. This especially happens when working with other directors/arrangers/creative team. Idk hopefully you understand what I'm saying?
*edit* Taylor said something to me that might clarify myself.
We both are big Huntington North fans because they have the best tone quality around the midwest (IMO) and they do things their own way. But even though they are super old school, they are WAY different than any other choir I see on a regular basis. By me going super old school, that is kinda my way of being able to cater to the scoresheet, yet still be different than everything I see at competitions nowadays. Maybe that makes a little more sense...
So what did everyone think of the changes to the competition at Johnston? I personally missed the stage in the auditorium at the middle school, but I will always prefer an auditorium over a gymnasium. Assuming the competition is going to stay in the gym, I think it would be good to collapse the risers on one side and move the stage to either the north or south side of the gym. That way all of the spectators are sitting in front of the stage instead of a majority of the seating being on the sides.
That and maybe get a stage with a little less wave to it. There were a couple of times during our show when the choir was doing some of the more aggressive choreography that the whole stage was moving. I was back at the keyboard and got that little feeling in the pit of my stomach like I was on a roller coaster or something because everything was moving.
It's also a little unfortunate that the food winds up being sooooo far from the performance venue in the new setup too, but that's a minor issue.
I agree, I thought that that it would have been set up utilizing more of the bleachers. There would have been about the same amount for seating probably and more people would have been able to see.
My friend and I also thought it would be a good idea to have karaoke or something in between groups. With all the lag time/breaks that are taken, why not do something fun and different like that?
So what did everyone think of the changes to the competition at Johnston? I personally missed the stage in the auditorium at the middle school, but I will always prefer an auditorium over a gymnasium. Assuming the competition is going to stay in the gym, I think it would be good to collapse the risers on one side and move the stage to either the north or south side of the gym. That way all of the spectators are sitting in front of the stage instead of a majority of the seating being on the sides.
That and maybe get a stage with a little less wave to it. There were a couple of times during our show when the choir was doing some of the more aggressive choreography that the whole stage was moving. I was back at the keyboard and got that little feeling in the pit of my stomach like I was on a roller coaster or something because everything was moving.
It's also a little unfortunate that the food winds up being sooooo far from the performance venue in the new setup too, but that's a minor issue.
QUOTE (juliofrommississippi @ Jan 25 2011, 12:14 AM)
But the post about Ankeny definitely proves my point. Anything that is not typical show choir isn't placing well here in the Midwest. There is a difference between doing well, and placing well that people are forgetting about, and shows simply cater to the score sheet nowadays.
Adversely, I think in California all shows seem to need to be out of the box. If you have a regular show choir show you don't place as well. At least it seems to me that all the Cali groups that place well have really weird themed shows.
I would agree with you to a point. I don't think shows in California have to be "out of the box" to place well, but I do think that the groups with the more "theatrical" style (I don't really think that's the best term to use) also tend to be the groups with the fresher material, the more innovative arrangements, and tend to just be larger groups in general. These things all help give them an edge at competitions, I believe. There is no column for "flashy backdrops" on the scoresheet, though... the set designs and extravagant costuming are just a way to make the most out of every part of a show. Does a group need smoke and mirrors to sing well? Of course not... but we are show choirs, not just choir choirs. Part of the magic of a show choir set is the way it can engage an audience, and paying attention to all of the elements of a show can help take it to the next level.
There has clearly been some change in the Midwest as well (we all feed off of each other), but if every group in California still wore sequined vests with matching dresses and performed songs like "All That Jazz" like we were doing 10-15 years ago, I would personally be far less interested to sit in a theater and watch 10 hours of show choir. Just personal preference. There was a post in the show choir discussion forum about how "if no one repeated any songs, there would be no music left to perform." I don't want to pick on the guy at all, but I think one feather in groups like Burbank and Burroughs' cap (and more recently groups like Los Al and Hart, too) are that they are constantly reaching outside the box, picking new songs, trying new styles, keeping things fresh. What may seem "emo" and "weird" to you is "exciting" to me. It's part of an evolution of style. What's the point in doing the same thing over and over and over again? Again, personal opinion.
I do find it interesting, though, that you say "there is a difference between doing well and placing well that people are forgetting about, and shows simply cater to the score sheet nowadays," but then you go on to say "I know what scores well and I would give groups shows that do score well." It seems a bit confusing to me. Are you criticizing the groups who do play to the scoresheet, or are you saying that's what everyone should be doing? I think the fundamentals of good singing, clean choreography, and precise execution are a foundation that every show choir should display, but I really don't think that the artistic shows out here are making the scoresheet their absolute top priority. In fact, if there is a "formula" that would guarantee top marks, then by its nature I would say it's not worth striving for because by definition it's a closed box. As long as you learn the rules first, it's knowing how to break them in the right places where true moments of brilliance occur.
Amen. Pushing boundaries is where it's at. Why do something that everyone else does every year? Sure it'll do well, but that's someone else's victory that you're making your own. That's not original. That's not art. Do something that nobody has seen before, and then do it well.
Here's how I view it. Nobody is ever going to do "I Drove All Night" better than Attache. Or "The Impossible Dream" better than Huntington or "Lacrimosa" from Mozart's Requiem better than Burbank. So why try? Why not do the chorus feature of Beethoven's 9th or "It Don't Make Sense" from Parade? Something NOBODY has done before, and make it killer? Make a name for yourself. Be out there. But don't make it flashy and come with an Epilepsy warning. Make it art. Not a cookie-cutter 5 song set.
I think it's really funny to listen to Ben and I post. We both came from the same program, which has a completely unique, and like Ben said, simple style. We both understand and respect the different styles. We just really like to push to the boundaries of the genre.... They just happen to be the complete opposite boundaries from each other
Ben is obviously the writer/composer, and I am obviously the performer. He is focused and succinct, and I have a thousand ideas all bouncing in different directions. Taking from Celebrity Apprentice; he is Holly Robinson Peete, and I am Cyndi Lauper. lol
I agree. Many choirs nowadays are just doing the same old thing. The same old Damon arms and awesome staging with the same old arrangements they all buy from Ankeny or copy from Clinton.
And that's really the main reason I love Burbank. Their shows are completely original. And I think that April and Damon is one of the best duos ever. April's organic and intricate movements combined with Damon's staging and effective movements combine to make something that is both expressive and creative, as well as staged incredibly well, and rippled like no other. Everything about their show last year was enthralling. The plot line. The incredible sound they created. The movements. The creativity in not only the show, and the design, but in each individual member. Everything was just absolutely brilliant. Regardless of if you enjoyed the show or not... nobody can deny the intensity, passion, and just sheer awesome that came out of Burbank last year. They're redefining what "show choir" is. And that is very exciting.
Now, don't get me wrong. I love a nice old-school show. Long dresses, tap dancing, gorgeous dark sound. I love it. But, this new "California Style" is something that gets me very excited. The warm but somehow bright, powerful, forward, chesty, ripping vocals that stay incredibly balanced, and then switch to Whitacre stuff is just mind-blowing. I think that we're going to see a really big chasam in the show choir world. Those who follow the "California Revolution" and those who stick to the roots. The Burbanks and Burroughs VS. the Clintons and the Huntingtons. And then there one or two groups who have directors like Dr. Kreitzer, who do completely original, high energy shows and impressive vocal performances, that somehow stay simple and straight forward and just fun without all the sets and lights. It's all very very exciting.
When you juxtapose this with the earlier discussion about whether there are too many "bells and whistles" in some shows, I think... well, actually, I don't know what to think. Do some people view "original" shows as full of "bells and whistles", or can a show be "original" without said ornamentation? I find it odd that you're asking for originality when you dislike some of the Cali shows so much, though. I guess, as with most show choir-related topics, it's subjectively in the eye of the beholder.
Bells and whistles (props) are a category on many scoresheets, and many choirs have used a lot of props over the years, so having an abundance of them is not a new concept. It's not necessarily the props that I'm over, but more the same choreography with the same style of singing, with the same show flow, with the same dresses, with the same blocking..... etc etc etc.
I dislike many Cali shows because they are not my style AT ALL, as anyone who knows me would know. Obviously groups like Burbank and Burroughs sing and dance EXTREMELY well, but the show design (especially last year's crazy shows) is just really not what entertains me. They deserve all the awards they get, because they are fantastic. They are just really not my style.
My personal style is definitely not the most original, in fact it would be considered a re-vamped "old school", I would describe it as very extravagant, Las Vegas. But like I said: go too out of the box and you don't score well. I know what scores well and I would give groups shows that do score well. I like old school because I think it provides a sophistication and allows for the best, most mature and most HEALTHY singing, but it definitely departs from the show choir show you see 20 times in a row at any given competition nowadays... The April/April-knockoff/Damon (which are always good and done very well, I'm not trying to knock on Damon or April or her proteges, because they are great, i just only see those shows at competitions anymore) I mean even Dwight gives the same choreography to all of his groups, even though I usually find Dwight shows to be very entertaining and fun. The groups all even sing the same nowadays. Shout shout shout shout shout. Sing really soft for no musical reason. SHOUT SOME MORE. CYMBAL CRASSSSH!!!! Idk I'm rambling but hopefully you get what I'm saying.
But even talking about Cali schools... Is it original when now every California school does a weird show that is REALLY REALLY out of the box? They are always doing emo songs with emo themes with emo costumes and while they are all different songs they are still all the same.
You can definitely have an original show without ornamentation. One group that is the epitome of that to me is CR Washington. Year in and year out they put on shows that no other group in the nation does. They have their own distinct style, and it is FUN, but they don't use props. At most they will include some hats. My senior year we tried to add props, and it just distracted from the show. They don't have the same really sequin-y show choir dresses with the pointy pumps that match the dresses. The style of the show is the reason why I transferred to Wash. DK chooses songs that no one else chooses, and does them in a way that is all his own. I would much rather do a show like that that might not score as well rather than doing the same April/Damon moves over and over and over in the same blocking for 4 years. And I mean it's all armography with intricate staging. I would rather see a choir just get up there and sing and dance really really well.
Geez... what is it with me and novels tonight? (still blaming Ben Schmidt)
QUOTE (juliofrommississippi @ Jan 25 2011, 12:14 AM)
But the post about Ankeny definitely proves my point. Anything that is not typical show choir isn't placing well here in the Midwest. There is a difference between doing well, and placing well that people are forgetting about, and shows simply cater to the score sheet nowadays..
When you juxtapose this with the earlier discussion about whether there are too many "bells and whistles" in some shows, I think... well, actually, I don't know what to think. Do some people view "original" shows as full of "bells and whistles", or can a show be "original" without said ornamentation? I find it odd that you're asking for originality when you dislike some of the Cali shows so much, though. I guess, as with most show choir-related topics, it's subjectively in the eye of the beholder.
According to some of the results threads, there was at least one other group in Norris' division. I'm just trying to determine how many there were total, regardless of how many placements there were. Thanks for trying to help, though.
I didn't bother to think Omaha Westside girls would be competing in 3A, since it's usually based on school size, though now that it has been posted I remember seeing that in the results thread. I was right about the varsity groups though :-P
But the post about Ankeny definitely proves my point. Anything that is not typical show choir isn't placing well here in the Midwest. There is a difference between doing well, and placing well that people are forgetting about, and shows simply cater to the score sheet nowadays.
Adversely, I think in California all shows seem to need to be out of the box. If you have a regular show choir show you don't place as well. At least it seems to me that all the Cali groups that place well have really weird themed shows.
According to some of the results threads, there was at least one other group in Norris' division. I'm just trying to determine how many there were total, regardless of how many placements there were. Thanks for trying to help, though.
It's all good, Haak. I should have remembered that Westside's girls group, Simply Irresistible, usually competes as a mixed lower-division group, which they did in this case as earlier stated; they were the other group in 3A.
I can't help but feel confused about where the judging of show choir is headed. It seems to be less about the talent and more about the bells and whistles or how loud a group is. I've experienced this at just about all of the competitions I've been to in the last 2 years. All of the finalists from Johnston are incredible groups, all of them deserve to be highly praised, but I have to give a shout out to Omaha Westside for earning their placements on awe-inspiring vocals and show execution rather than loud props and theatrics.
I would like to apologize, because this is not the opinion of our entire group. Everyone preformed their hearts out on Saturday, and really that is all that matters.
Congratulations to everyone!
QUOTE (juliofrommississippi @ Jan 24 2011, 03:42 PM)
Haakon. Looking at the groups in the Mixed I category it looks to me like Norris was the only 3A group.
Hi Jay,
According to some of the results threads, there was at least one other group in Norris' division. I'm just trying to determine how many there were total, regardless of how many placements there were. Thanks for trying to help, though.
Here are the results from the daytime competition.
Hi Jacob!
Thanks for taking the time to follow up. I did see the results post earlier in the thread; I just didn't know if this was also complete schedule information (often times people list only the groups that got trophies when providing results, but not the groups in the division who didn't place... makes sense). If there are indeed only two groups in that division, I'll go ahead and make adjustments; I just didn't want to assume anything.
QUOTE (juliofrommississippi @ Jan 24 2011, 03:42 PM)
This is something I've felt has led show choir in a less than desirable direction. It really does seem like I am watching the same show over and over and over when I go to a competition to watch. It's the same choreography with the same staging, with the same arrangments, with the same uber-guitars, and the same costumes. I am literally craving a breath of fresh air, but I doubt I'll get it because it's been shown that those groups that aren't the typical show choir don't place well and so groups are abandoning creativity.
Haakon. Looking at the groups in the Mixed I category it looks to me like Norris was the only 3A group. I believe DM Roosevelt, Indianola, SE Polk, and WDM Valley are all 4A schools (at least for sports they are). I can't confirm that since I wasn't at Johnston, but going off of my sports knowledge I would assume Norris was the only 3A school. Maybe that is another reason for all the confusion.
I think a prime example of this would be Ankeny's show from last year. It was "interpretaed(sp?)" as being angry/out-of-the box and I feel personally it was one of ankeny's best performed shows in a few years however they were repeatedly placed lower at competitions last year. Now weather it was because there were things that judges saw that I didn't or the lights didn't shine right off some mars gas idk however I do know that they were told those things by judges at multiple competitions they attended. I am getting this from my bro who was/is in VA take it for what that is worth. Anywho I tend to agree that show choir has become too "in the box"
I think the placement information at the top of this page is what may be confusing; the division shows that Jefferson got 6th place and Norris got no placement, which obviously doesn't make much sense since Norris ended up in finals. The issue is that Norris was actually in a different division, and I would love to update that information, but I haven't yet received a proper rundown of who was in what division and how the placements went in order to be able to do that. As soon as someone can provide this, I will be happy to update the page.
Here are the results from the daytime competition.
Prep
GC Ankeny "Perpetual Motion"
1st RU Place Thomas Jefferson "The Jefferson Jive
2nd RU Place Urbandale "Vitality"
3rd RU Place Waukee "Spirit"
Participation: Ankeny "Intensity"
3A
GC Place Norris "Gold"
1st RU Place Omaha Westside "Simply Irresistable" (Although a prep group, they competed in 3A)
4A
GC Hastings "Riverside Company"
1st RU Place Urbandale "Studio"
2nd RU Place Ankeny "Visual Adrenaline"
3rd RU Place Omaha Westside "ATSC"
4th RU Place Waukee "Millenium
5th RU Place Thomas Jefferson "Jefferson Connection"
Participation: Indianola "Side One", Roosevelt "Varsity, Southeast Polk "RAMification", Valley "Choralation. (In no particular order)
Norris had a higher score than Thomas Jefferson, so they made finals instead of them.
as to the judging I feel that ANY of the top six if they do that show six seven years ago they blow all of the other groups out of the water, however since the quality of show choirs has increased so much that the groups are nearly identical(i.e. all have very clean chereo, great vocals, etc.) that now subjectivity has creeped its way into judging, which while a bad thing After watching finals, I was like wow who to pick because all six groups were so good, its just like what do you do. Just my thoughts.
This is something I've felt has led show choir in a less than desirable direction. It really does seem like I am watching the same show over and over and over when I go to a competition to watch. It's the same choreography with the same staging, with the same arrangments, with the same uber-guitars, and the same costumes. I am literally craving a breath of fresh air, but I doubt I'll get it because it's been shown that those groups that aren't the typical show choir don't place well and so groups are abandoning creativity.
Haakon. Looking at the groups in the Mixed I category it looks to me like Norris was the only 3A group. I believe DM Roosevelt, Indianola, SE Polk, and WDM Valley are all 4A schools (at least for sports they are). I can't confirm that since I wasn't at Johnston, but going off of my sports knowledge I would assume Norris was the only 3A school. Maybe that is another reason for all the confusion.
Johnston Showzam 2011
