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

Re: Number of Judges

Expand Messages
  • Matt Swann
    ... one judge was ... 79, 78, and ... Very good point. Even the best judge in the Society can be off from time to time (yes, even you Gene.) When humans are
    Message 1 of 12 , Apr 1, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In bbshop@yahoogroups.com, Brian Gordon <briang@p...> wrote:
      > Because judges are human ... Haven't you been to a contest where
      one judge was
      > "off", at least for you? When you see scores in one category of
      79, 78, and
      > 62, you are glad the 62 wasn't the only one there!

      Very good point. Even the best judge in the Society can be off from
      time to time (yes, even you Gene.) When humans are involved, it will
      never be completely objective. Until we come up with judging
      machines (Which, by the way, wouldn't require hotel rooms, plane
      tickets and food that we pay the judges for **wink wink** :-))

      Yet its the human aspect that makes judges so great. It makes the
      competition less certain. There is no "formula" for winning
      contests, because certain judges like this sound or that sound a
      little better. They can still tell a good sound from a bad one, of
      course, but the uncertainty adds a bit of excitment to contests!

      Matt Swann
      Coral Gables, FL
      Baritone, the Miamians
      Choral Studies at the University of Miami
      Tenor, University of Miami Chorale
      AOL Screen Name: IlovetheVM
    • David Roberts
      For that matter, let s use a *secular* example and just have instant replay judge all plays on the football field or baseball diamond. Judges, like umpires and
      Message 2 of 12 , Apr 2, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        For that matter, let's use a *secular* example and just have instant
        replay judge all plays on the football field or baseball diamond.
        Judges, like umpires and referees, are part of the *games* that we
        play each season. Their experiences and skills are what we
        contestants are measured against and I, for one, would not have it
        any other way. How else can we be sure that our *work* is
        entertaining to *real people*?
        Dave Roberts
        bari - Final Note / Tulsa Founders Chorus

        --- In bbshop@yahoogroups.com, "Matt Swann" <vmfaninflorida@y...>
        wrote:
        > --- In bbshop@yahoogroups.com, Brian Gordon <briang@p...> wrote:
        > > Because judges are human ... Haven't you been to a contest where
        > one judge was
        > > "off", at least for you? When you see scores in one category of
        > 79, 78, and
        > > 62, you are glad the 62 wasn't the only one there!
        >
        > Very good point. Even the best judge in the Society can be off
        from
        > time to time (yes, even you Gene.) When humans are involved, it
        will
        > never be completely objective. Until we come up with judging
        > machines (Which, by the way, wouldn't require hotel rooms, plane
        > tickets and food that we pay the judges for **wink wink** :-))
        >
        > Yet its the human aspect that makes judges so great. It makes the
        > competition less certain. There is no "formula" for winning
        > contests, because certain judges like this sound or that sound a
        > little better. They can still tell a good sound from a bad one, of
        > course, but the uncertainty adds a bit of excitment to contests!
        >
        > Matt Swann
        > Coral Gables, FL
        > Baritone, the Miamians
        > Choral Studies at the University of Miami
        > Tenor, University of Miami Chorale
        > AOL Screen Name: IlovetheVM
      • rogsp10r@aol.com
        In a message dated 4/2/03 8:01:23 AM, drobpam@swbell.net writes:
        Message 3 of 12 , Apr 2, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          In a message dated 4/2/03 8:01:23 AM, drobpam@... writes:

          << Their experiences and skills are what we

          contestants are measured against and I, for one, would not have it

          any other way. How else can we be sure that our *work* is

          entertaining to *real people*? >>

          Ummm, sing for real audiences as opposed to convention/judge audiences?

          Of all the wonderful things I think judges do, making sure that we're
          entertaining to real people AIN'T one of 'em.

          Roger Payne
          Music Judge
        • Jack Martin
          Hi Rog and all, It took a bit of thinking about, but I think you are right about what our judges NOT do! ( That being, making sure we entertain real people.
          Message 4 of 12 , Apr 2, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            Hi Rog and all, It took a bit of thinking about, but I think you are right
            about what our judges NOT do! ( That being, making sure we entertain real
            people. )

            I think it's difficult to identify all the things our judges do, but it seem
            to be a measurement of performance against certain criteria, that if done
            well, will surely result in entertaining those who are dedicated to the
            Barbershop style. And possibly to those who just enjoy good, well tuned, a
            cappella, four part music. (real people?)

            Am I screwed up, or does this make sense?
            In Harmony
            Jack Martin

            Rog says:

            Of all the wonderful things I think judges do, making sure that we're
            entertaining to real people AIN'T one of 'em.

            Roger Payne
            Music Judge
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.