Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [bbshop] Re: Results of the LOL District quartet prelims??

Expand Messages
  • Shelley Herman
    How about letting the rest of us on Harmonet know what this is all about. Shelley Herman saherman@pacbell.net ... [Non-text portions of this message have been
    Message 1 of 24 , May 7, 2013
      How about letting the rest of us on Harmonet know what this is all
      about.

      Shelley Herman
      saherman@...

      On May 7, 2013, at 6:46 AM, tpblead wrote:

      > I have to disagree with you, Jim. At the same time, I vigorously
      > applaud the quartet that did this. For many years I have read on
      > this board that we have gotten too competition oriented and taken
      > the fun out of our hobby. Well this quartet put some fun back into
      > the LOL convention (how appropriately named!). They did it with
      > full knowledge of what the rules were and did it anyway. A few
      > years ago, a chorus in MAD took the bold step of using a song from
      > the musical Rent, that was blatantly non-barbershop, in their
      > contest set, as a tribute to the arranger, Walter Latzko. Both
      > groups did this with full knowledge of the rules, and the penalties
      > that they would incur and did it anyway. Bravo!
      >
      > However, to change, or waive the rules, simply because they appealed
      > to an emotional chord within the audience would be wrong. The
      > contest has to have set rules, or it is of no value, but a
      > performance of this type carries its own reward. It is not
      > reflected on the scoresheet, but that is ok. In this case, they met
      > their goal, and that is all that matters.
      >
      > Tim Buell
      >
      >
      > --- In bbshop@yahoogroups.com, Jim and Holly <browncatt@...> wrote:
      >>
      >> What a disappointing application/interp of the rule, seems
      >> necessarily
      >> punitive in this case and just feels like a "bah humbug" moment from
      >> scrooge!
      >>
      >> Haven't we seen numerous surprise cameo appearances of famous
      >> barbershoppers within International chorus competitions? Were they
      >> all
      >> members of the chorus they performed with? I guess they must have
      >> been.
      >>
      >> hmph!
      >>
      >> Jim Catt
      >> Director of Music
      >> Sydney Vocal Project
      >> www.sydneyvocalproject.com
      >> mobile
      >>
      >>
      >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >>
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Donna Whitehouse
      Shelley, It was included in one of the previous emails... they taught a tag to the whole audience which meant that the presentation judges had to disqualify
      Message 2 of 24 , May 7, 2013
        Shelley,

        It was included in one of the previous emails... they taught a tag to the
        whole audience which meant that the presentation judges had to disqualify
        them.

        Donna


        --
        "Some days there won�t be a song in your heart. Sing anyway." Emory Austin


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Bruce
        From the horses mouth as they say.... Bruce Checca Jim Emory wrote: I will clarify the 0 scores from PRS, as this was my quartet, Cranial Cabbage. The
        Message 3 of 24 , May 7, 2013
          From the horses mouth as they say....

          Bruce Checca

          Jim Emory wrote:

          I will clarify the 0 scores from PRS, as this was my quartet, Cranial
          Cabbage.

          The "Limerick Song" was a collection of seven Limericks assembled into a
          simple medley. The majority of the lyrics were written by our bass Bruce
          Watson. The music was a slight alteration to the melody from the
          children's song "If You're Happy And You Know It, Clap Your Hands". The
          arrangement was mine.

          While I'd love to feed the titillation factor that often comes with
          Limericks, the 0 scores were not due to poor taste. One of the Limericks
          did start with "There once was a tenor named Chuck...", but we didn't go
          there. The rhymes for Chuck were "buck" and "duck". :-)

          The second Limerick was about how much we love barbershop. The final line
          involved teaching a one line tag to the members of the quartet. Part of
          the humor was that the baritone was clueless in learning his part and
          clearly needed help. We thought (out loud) of asking help from the judges
          but decided against that. So the lead (me) taught the baritone part to the
          audience in the hall. The audience then sang the tag with the quartet.

          There is a contest rule that states "Persons who are not members of the
          competing chorus or quartet may not appear on stage during the
          performance." Although the audience was not physically on stage, we had,
          in effect, extended the stage into the auditorium and included them as
          performers. Since they were not members of the quartet but were involved
          in the performance, we had violated the intent of this rule resulting in a
          score of 0 from each Presentation judge.

          Since this was the first real stage performance by this quartet, I cannot
          imagine anything we could have done that would have gathered more
          attention. So, in the end, this was probably a great marketing ploy for
          the quartet, although we certainly never expected it.

          -- Jim
          ___________________________________________________
          Jim Emery
          Singing Judge
          Quartet & chorus coach
          www.barbershopcoach.com

          On 5/7/2013 12:00 PM, Shelley Herman wrote:
          >
          > How about letting the rest of us on Harmonet know what this is all
          > about.
          >
          > Shelley Herman
          > saherman@... <mailto:saherman%40pacbell.net>
          >



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • David
          That s hugely better than a bad-taste violation, and I applaud you! I did an actual LOL when I pictured your quartet turning to the audience for help. And
          Message 4 of 24 , May 7, 2013
            That's hugely better than a bad-taste violation, and I applaud you! I did an actual "LOL" when I pictured your quartet turning to the audience for help. And judges have been known to disagree on rule interpretation. For instance, the rule about talking on stage.

            I was in a quartet that competed at International with a military package, including a comedy song. We wanted to "call cadence" for our entry and exit, so we checked with the (I think it was still Stage Presence?) category specialist, who said it was acceptable since we wouldn't be directly addressing the audience. We did well that year, finishing 13th, but unbeknownst to us, we had kicked off a major argument in the category, in which (if my sources are accurate) the next year's category specialist stated that we should have been DQ'd. The following year, we ended up 17 places lower using the same package. I heard through the grapevine that we were saved from DQ only because of the previous year's precedent.

            But nowadays, quartets talk up a storm, for some incredibly entertaining contest packages, without fear of DQ. I like to think it was, in part, due to our setting that precedent.

            Dave Garstang


            --- In bbshop@yahoogroups.com, Jim Emery <james.e.emery@...> wrote:
            >
            > I will clarify the 0 scores from PRS, as this was my quartet,
            > Cranial Cabbage.
            >
            > The "Limerick Song" was a collection of seven Limericks assembled
            > into a simple medley. The majority of the lyrics were written by
            > our bass Bruce Watson. The music was a slight alteration to the
            > melody from the children's song "If You're Happy And You Know It,
            > Clap Your Hands". The arrangement was mine.
            >
            > While I'd love to feed the titillation factor that often comes
            > with Limericks, the 0 scores were not due to poor taste. One of
            > the Limericks did start with "There once was a tenor named
            > Chuck...", but we didn't go there. The rhymes for Chuck
            > were "buck" and "duck". :-)
            >
            > The second Limerick was about how much we love barbershop. The
            > final line involved teaching a one line tag to the members of
            > the quartet. Part of the humor was that the baritone was
            > clueless in learning his part and clearly needed help. We
            > thought (out loud) of asking help from the judges but decided
            > against that. So the lead (me) taught the baritone part to the
            > audience in the hall. The audience then sang the tag with the
            > quartet.
            >
            > There is a contest rule that states "Persons who are not
            > members of the competing chorus or quartet may not appear on
            > stage during the performance." Although the audience was not
            > physically on stage, we had, in effect, extended the stage into
            > the auditorium and included them as performers. Since they
            > were not members of the quartet but were involved in the
            > performance, we had violated the intent of this rule resulting
            > in a score of 0 from each Presentation judge.
            >
            > Since this was the first real stage performance by this quartet,
            > I cannot imagine anything we could have done that would have
            > gathered more attention. So, in the end, this was probably a
            > great marketing ploy for the quartet, although we certainly
            > never expected it.
            >
            > -- Jim
            > ___________________________________________________
            > Jim Emery
            > Singing Judge
            > Quartet & chorus coach
            > www.barbershopcoach.com
          • Bruce B
            Am I the only one getting annoyed by groups using the Contest stage (by way of purposefully breaking the rules) as a means of advertising their performance
            Message 5 of 24 , May 8, 2013
              Am I the only one getting annoyed by groups "using" the Contest stage (by way of purposefully breaking the rules) as a means of advertising their performance for prospective shows or to make a point? Not that this is getting out of hand but it seems there is at least one performance a contest cycle that seems to fit the type that we're discussing here.

              I realize that over the years, that songs/chords, talking on stage, arrangements can push the envelope of what is currently acceptable in the judging community and I'm not speaking to those choices. It's groups that sound like this one that flat out know they are not just pushing the envelope but shattering/breaking the rules. Quote from this situation below:

              > Since this was the first real stage performance by this quartet,
              > I cannot imagine anything we could have done that would have
              > gathered more attention. So, in the end, this was probably a
              > great marketing ploy for the quartet, although we certainly
              > never expected it.

              In my 20+ years, I've seen both quartets and choruses "use" the contest stage to make a statement like this. Religious or non-barbershop songs to remember a member that has passed, comedy that is pushing the envelope of good taste for quartet PR, pushing the limit of who can be on stage, etc. It seems to me that there is a time and place to make these type of performances: Mic-testing, afterglows, special performances before or after the contest. Even if the motivations are noble, the contest stage is still not the place for such performances. The contest stage is for contest purposes only.

              It seems to me that the consequences of consciously making a choice like these should be more than just losing points. In most cases, the performers know ahead of time that a stiff penalty and/or DQ is going to happen and are willing to take the penalty for being able to use the contest stage to make their point!

              Should there be something more significant for these flagrant violations?? Sitting out a contest cycle, pre-approval of material for the next contest come to mind.

              In the end, the contest stage is not just ANY stage and there are certain parameters for what is to be done and not done there. Groups should not be allowed to be able to flippantly cast aside the rules just to promote themselves or to make a personal point.


              There is a time and place for everything,

              Bruce Baedke <><

              --- In bbshop@yahoogroups.com, "quartetmandh" <quartetmandh@...> wrote:
              >
              > Does anyone have any results of the quartet prelims at the LOL District Convention??
              >
              >
              > Thanks!!
              >
              > David Haase
              >
            • John Elving
              We seem to forget that our primary purpose, even in contest, is to entertain the audience. Yes, there are guidelines (rules), but we aren t there primarily to
              Message 6 of 24 , May 8, 2013
                We seem to forget that our primary purpose, even in contest, is to entertain
                the audience. Yes, there are guidelines (rules), but we aren't there
                primarily to impress the judges. Our job is really to impress the audience,
                no matter the venue. Yes, they did know they were pushing the limits, as
                many groups do, and this has been taking place through the history of our
                Society. It isn't something new. And how is that really different than a
                chorus getting up on the contest stage, holding up five or six numbered
                signs and letting the judges or audience pick two numbers and that
                determining what songs you will sing in contest. Seems like either way the
                audience wins!

                Sing-cerely & Humm-bly,

                John Elving
                Editor-in-Cheap, Shrine of Democracy Chorus
                Bass - SOUND ENGINEERING Quartet
                RMD Exec. VP
                PROBE President
                OIF Trainer, SOP Evaluator
                mailto:leaderman@...
                605-381-9680
                Skype: john.elving



                From: bbshop@yahoogroups.com [mailto:bbshop@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
                Bruce B
                Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2013 2:41 PM
                To: bbshop@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: [bbshop] Re: Results of the LOL District quartet prelims??

                Am I the only one getting annoyed by groups "using" the Contest stage (by
                way of purposefully breaking the rules) as a means of advertising their
                performance for prospective shows or to make a point? Not that this is
                getting out of hand but it seems there is at least one performance a contest
                cycle that seems to fit the type that we're discussing here.

                I realize that over the years, that songs/chords, talking on stage,
                arrangements can push the envelope of what is currently acceptable in the
                judging community and I'm not speaking to those choices. It's groups that
                sound like this one that flat out know they are not just pushing the
                envelope but shattering/breaking the rules. Quote from this situation below:

                > Since this was the first real stage performance by this quartet,
                > I cannot imagine anything we could have done that would have
                > gathered more attention. So, in the end, this was probably a
                > great marketing ploy for the quartet, although we certainly
                > never expected it.

                In my 20+ years, I've seen both quartets and choruses "use" the contest
                stage to make a statement like this. Religious or non-barbershop songs to
                remember a member that has passed, comedy that is pushing the envelope of
                good taste for quartet PR, pushing the limit of who can be on stage, etc. It
                seems to me that there is a time and place to make these type of
                performances: Mic-testing, afterglows, special performances before or after
                the contest. Even if the motivations are noble, the contest stage is still
                not the place for such performances. The contest stage is for contest
                purposes only.

                It seems to me that the consequences of consciously making a choice like
                these should be more than just losing points. In most cases, the performers
                know ahead of time that a stiff penalty and/or DQ is going to happen and are
                willing to take the penalty for being able to use the contest stage to make
                their point!

                Should there be something more significant for these flagrant violations??
                Sitting out a contest cycle, pre-approval of material for the next contest
                come to mind.

                In the end, the contest stage is not just ANY stage and there are certain
                parameters for what is to be done and not done there. Groups should not be
                allowed to be able to flippantly cast aside the rules just to promote
                themselves or to make a personal point.

                There is a time and place for everything,

                Bruce Baedke <><
              • Bruce
                Well, from where I sit Bruce... Yes...yes you are ! :-D The problem with pre-qualifying is where do you set the limit... and who does that? Bad placement
                Message 7 of 24 , May 8, 2013
                  Well, from where I sit Bruce... "Yes...yes you are"! :-D The problem
                  with pre-qualifying is where do you set the limit... and who does that?
                  Bad placement / lower scores are the way to control that best it seems.

                  Bruce Checca

                  On 5/8/2013 4:40 PM, Bruce B wrote:
                  >
                  > Am I the only one getting annoyed by groups "using" the Contest stage
                  > (by way of purposefully breaking the rules) as a means of advertising
                  > their performance for prospective shows or to make a point? Not that
                  > this is getting out of hand but it seems there is at least one
                  > performance a contest cycle that seems to fit the type that we're
                  > discussing here.
                  >

                  ...then...

                  It seems to me that the consequences of consciously making a choice like
                  these should be more than just losing points. In most cases, the
                  performers know ahead of time that a stiff penalty and/or DQ is going to
                  happen and are willing to take the penalty for being able to use the
                  contest stage to make their point!

                  Should there be something more significant for these flagrant
                  violations?? Sitting out a contest cycle, pre-approval of material for
                  the next contest come to mind.
                  >
                  >
                  > Bruce Baedke <><
                  >



                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Bill Kane
                  Bruce - I think you are jumping at the wrong conclusion from Jim s words. He is a judge and I don t think would be intentionally going on the contest stage
                  Message 8 of 24 , May 8, 2013
                    Bruce - I think you are jumping at the wrong conclusion from Jim's words. He is a judge and I don't think would be intentionally going on the contest stage "breaking the rules". It sounds like "making the best of the situation" language to me. I don't imagine that the quartet thought this particular rule would be so broadly interpreted as to cover their action. Thanks to Jim for providing an explanation for us. Bill KanePhoenix
                    To: bbshop@yahoogroups.com
                    From: kbaedke@...
                    Date: Wed, 8 May 2013 20:40:37 +0000
                    Subject: [bbshop] Re: Results of the LOL District quartet prelims??






























                    Am I the only one getting annoyed by groups "using" the Contest stage (by way of purposefully breaking the rules) as a means of advertising their performance for prospective shows or to make a point? Not that this is getting out of hand but it seems there is at least one performance a contest cycle that seems to fit the type that we're discussing here.



                    I realize that over the years, that songs/chords, talking on stage, arrangements can push the envelope of what is currently acceptable in the judging community and I'm not speaking to those choices. It's groups that sound like this one that flat out know they are not just pushing the envelope but shattering/breaking the rules. Quote from this situation below:



                    > Since this was the first real stage performance by this quartet,

                    > I cannot imagine anything we could have done that would have

                    > gathered more attention. So, in the end, this was probably a

                    > great marketing ploy for the quartet, although we certainly

                    > never expected it.



                    In my 20+ years, I've seen both quartets and choruses "use" the contest stage to make a statement like this. Religious or non-barbershop songs to remember a member that has passed, comedy that is pushing the envelope of good taste for quartet PR, pushing the limit of who can be on stage, etc. It seems to me that there is a time and place to make these type of performances: Mic-testing, afterglows, special performances before or after the contest. Even if the motivations are noble, the contest stage is still not the place for such performances. The contest stage is for contest purposes only.



                    It seems to me that the consequences of consciously making a choice like these should be more than just losing points. In most cases, the performers know ahead of time that a stiff penalty and/or DQ is going to happen and are willing to take the penalty for being able to use the contest stage to make their point!



                    Should there be something more significant for these flagrant violations?? Sitting out a contest cycle, pre-approval of material for the next contest come to mind.



                    In the end, the contest stage is not just ANY stage and there are certain parameters for what is to be done and not done there. Groups should not be allowed to be able to flippantly cast aside the rules just to promote themselves or to make a personal point.



                    There is a time and place for everything,



                    Bruce Baedke <><



                    --- In bbshop@yahoogroups.com, "quartetmandh" <quartetmandh@...> wrote:

                    >

                    > Does anyone have any results of the quartet prelims at the LOL District Convention??

                    >

                    >

                    > Thanks!!

                    >

                    > David Haase

                    >


















                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Bill Byrd
                    John, A chapter in MAD did that a few years ago, Princeton New jersey, Under the direction of Rich Levine. They did it so as to not spend the summer working on
                    Message 9 of 24 , May 8, 2013
                      John,
                      A chapter in MAD did that a few years ago, Princeton New jersey, Under the
                      direction of Rich Levine. They did it so as to not spend the summer working
                      on "just two songs..." They sang very well.
                      Bill Byrd


                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Bruce B
                      Bad placement and lower scores is what is already not working. Quartets are disregarding any penalties. My suggestion is that quartets submit with their
                      Message 10 of 24 , May 8, 2013
                        Bad placement and lower scores is what is already not working. Quartets are disregarding any penalties. My suggestion is that quartets submit with their contest registration, their agreement to a check list of things that are not allowed on contest stage. Quartets already have to submit paperwork on arrangements and copyright information already. Adding this extra step would insure that quartets are informed of the rules and any consequences for any violation.

                        Judging by the varied responses here and in my inbox, it seems that that there is a big difference in opinions about what is and isn't a problem. All the more reason that some system to make this clear is necessary.

                        Bruce Baedke <><


                        --- In bbshop@yahoogroups.com, Bruce <bruce.checca@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > Well, from where I sit Bruce... "Yes...yes you are"! :-D The problem
                        > with pre-qualifying is where do you set the limit... and who does that?
                        > Bad placement / lower scores are the way to control that best it seems.
                        >
                        > Bruce Checca
                        >
                        > On 5/8/2013 4:40 PM, Bruce B wrote:
                        > >
                        > > Am I the only one getting annoyed by groups "using" the Contest stage
                        > > (by way of purposefully breaking the rules) as a means of advertising
                        > > their performance for prospective shows or to make a point? Not that
                        > > this is getting out of hand but it seems there is at least one
                        > > performance a contest cycle that seems to fit the type that we're
                        > > discussing here.
                        > >
                        >
                        > ...then...
                        >
                        > It seems to me that the consequences of consciously making a choice like
                        > these should be more than just losing points. In most cases, the
                        > performers know ahead of time that a stiff penalty and/or DQ is going to
                        > happen and are willing to take the penalty for being able to use the
                        > contest stage to make their point!
                        >
                        > Should there be something more significant for these flagrant
                        > violations?? Sitting out a contest cycle, pre-approval of material for
                        > the next contest come to mind.
                        > >
                        > >
                        > > Bruce Baedke <><
                        > >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        >
                      • Shelley Herman
                        Life has too many rules already. So long as they don t break the rules of good taste (keeping it G rated) let the quartets do what they want. If they get
                        Message 11 of 24 , May 8, 2013
                          Life has too many rules already. So long as they don't break the
                          rules of good taste (keeping it G rated) let the quartets do what they
                          want. If they get DQ'd, so what. The more participants we have in
                          contests the better. If some want to hoke it up, well that's up to
                          them. It's also a welcome relief for the audience. If you have ever
                          sat through international quarter finals you pray for a comedy quartet.

                          Let them do what they want. If the audience is enjoying it, they all
                          understand the contest rules and know that everyone is not going to
                          make the cut.

                          I always remember the Manhatters lead, Don Galvin, going on stage at
                          every contest saying: "I know where the judges are, point me at the
                          show chairmen." The only time they ever made the top ten was when
                          there were only eight contestants. They never won a contest and never
                          lost a show!

                          Shelley Herman
                          saherman@...




                          On May 8, 2013, at 5:24 PM, Bruce B wrote:

                          > Bad placement and lower scores is what is already not working.
                          > Quartets are disregarding any penalties. My suggestion is that
                          > quartets submit with their contest registration, their agreement to
                          > a check list of things that are not allowed on contest stage.
                          > Quartets already have to submit paperwork on arrangements and
                          > copyright information already. Adding this extra step would insure
                          > that quartets are informed of the rules and any consequences for any
                          > violation.
                          >
                          > Judging by the varied responses here and in my inbox, it seems that
                          > that there is a big difference in opinions about what is and isn't a
                          > problem. All the more reason that some system to make this clear is
                          > necessary.
                          >
                          > Bruce Baedke <><
                          >
                          >
                          > --- In bbshop@yahoogroups.com, Bruce <bruce.checca@...> wrote:
                          >>
                          >> Well, from where I sit Bruce... "Yes...yes you are"! :-D The
                          >> problem
                          >> with pre-qualifying is where do you set the limit... and who does
                          >> that?
                          >> Bad placement / lower scores are the way to control that best it
                          >> seems.
                          >>
                          >> Bruce Checca
                          >>
                          >> On 5/8/2013 4:40 PM, Bruce B wrote:
                          >>>
                          >>> Am I the only one getting annoyed by groups "using" the Contest
                          >>> stage
                          >>> (by way of purposefully breaking the rules) as a means of
                          >>> advertising
                          >>> their performance for prospective shows or to make a point? Not that
                          >>> this is getting out of hand but it seems there is at least one
                          >>> performance a contest cycle that seems to fit the type that we're
                          >>> discussing here.
                          >>>
                          >>
                          >> ...then...
                          >>
                          >> It seems to me that the consequences of consciously making a choice
                          >> like
                          >> these should be more than just losing points. In most cases, the
                          >> performers know ahead of time that a stiff penalty and/or DQ is
                          >> going to
                          >> happen and are willing to take the penalty for being able to use the
                          >> contest stage to make their point!
                          >>
                          >> Should there be something more significant for these flagrant
                          >> violations?? Sitting out a contest cycle, pre-approval of material
                          >> for
                          >> the next contest come to mind.
                          >>>
                          >>>
                          >>> Bruce Baedke <><
                          >>>
                          >>
                          >>
                          >>
                          >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          >>
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > ------------------------------------
                          >
                          > Yahoo! Groups Links
                          >
                          >
                          >



                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • Jim Emery
                          Bruce Baedke s accusations in this forum with respect to my quartet s recent contest performance are simply wrong and reflect that he didn t read my post very
                          Message 12 of 24 , May 8, 2013
                            Bruce Baedke's accusations in this forum with respect to my quartet's
                            recent contest performance are simply wrong and reflect that he didn't read
                            my post very carefully.

                            -- Jim
                            ___________________________________________________
                            Jim Emery
                            Singing Judge
                            Quartet & chorus coach
                            www.barbershopcoach.com


                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.