Apologies to the vast majority of people who read my blog who won’t be interested in this post at all as its a bit of a specialized post. My brother was in the brass band regional championships at the weekend, I was absolutely furious with the result, it was a joke. I was just going to write a post when I found this comment on 4 bars rest, the website of choice for the brass band world. It says exactly what I would say but in a much more eloquent way. I agree completely with what he says except may be for the comment about Desford, I agree that their quality shone in certain parts of the music but too many individual errors cost them in my eyes.
I don’t often feel compelled to write but after attending the Midlands Areas I felt I must do so. I’ve been attending contests for a number of years and have experienced a wide range of performances and adjudicating decisions.
However few have been as baffling as yesterday.
I have no affiliation to any of the bands, so listening as a neutral I cannot understand how the adjudicators came to their decision.
The winners, Desford, by their own admission, didn’t play to anywhere near their own high standards, with individual errors in a couple of the solo lines.
The last movement, in my opinion, felt rushed and detail was lost (it does say ‘As fast as possible’ but this shouldn’t be to the detriment of clarity). Nevertheless, the overall quality still shone and so a top 2 place was probably deserved.
However, it did seem that a number of members of the band were embarrassed to win after some of the mishaps!
Having listened to all 13 bands, I have to say that the only band for me, who came close to playing the piece convincingly were GUS, whose performance was most assured, both musically and rhythmically, with touches of class in the solo lines.
This seemed to be the general consensus and it was quite astonishing how so few bands were able to measure simple rhythms, particularly the triplet and semi-quaver figures prevalent in the 1st movement.
When the result of GUS coming 4th was announced, there was a gasp around the auditorium. Without wishing to take anything away from the bands who finished 2nd and 3rd, there was no doubting that they were not in the same league as GUS.
After yesterday’s contest, several thoughts come to mind:
Full credit to the adjudicators for coming out and explaining what they were looking for – but this seemed to contradict entirely the actual results they gave!
The best bands are the best bands because they have the best players. This sounds obvious even on an off day, and so bands who don’t have that same quality of personnel, even at their best, are still not on the same level.
It does seem that adjudicators have a habit of placing the loudest bands highest.
We all know that bands drawn near the beginning have less chance of winning, but if adjudication is supposed to be a fair process, why should this be the case?
There are some elements in music that are subjective and others that are objective. For example, tuning, split notes, tempi and rhythmic accuracy would be regarded as objective, whereas phrasing, musicality and interpretation conversely would be considered subjective.
If the adjudicators were unable to tell the difference between a top band and one that is clearly, to most listeners, several levels below, then one must question why they are in the box in the first place.
One has to ask the question, is it time for new blood in the box?
Alan Houghton
Nuneaton
One other point I would like to add is that it still amazes me after listen to a few competitions now that some of the top bands in the country (all championship bands are supposed to be of a certain standard) seem to have difficult with the basics. ALL good bands should be able to start and end phrases together, play in tune and be able to play dynamics appropriately and it amazes me that so many of them can’t.
no comments yet
Leave your comment