I agree whole-heartedly with both of these paragraphs. ESPECIALLY the first paragraph. Waubonsie's preliminary performance was out of this world. It was THE BEST show choir performance I have seen all season. I was extremely surprised along with countless other people who saw them live to hear that they were in third in the prelims.
As for Burroughs, I don't even know how to express what I saw. It just doesn't translate from a live performance to video (no... not even HD captures it) or even to our descriptions on here. It was truly touching. The people who were in Chicago (or have seen the show live) are the only ones who truly know the exceptional emotion and caliber of performance that Burroughs radiates.
Yeah, I can go down as one of those folks that thought WV's show was a winner - I had 'em in first for prelims AND finals actually. I know, I know - lot's of discussion can be had about their vocal tone (which some claim can be shouty) - but which I found to be exhilerating, or their choreography (which some found to be messy) - but which I found to be so physical and powerful, I felt while their execution might have suffered in comparison to the crazy cleanliness of Clinton, WV's show was still so WELL choreographed. I just have this whole new love for Dwight Jordan's work after seeing WV and Wheaton Warrenville this season. So what if they got 4th? If they continue to grow as exponentially as they have in just the past 2-3 years, at their next national contest (and there will be another I'm sure of it), the judges will have no choice but to place them first. I just have this gut feeling that these 2 suburban Chicago schools are going to soon be the industry standard - California had better watch out!
But as for Burrough's - it is really hard for it to translate to an itty bitty you tube video, but I just MUST share this quote from a friend. Occasionally, I send links to good show choir stuff - and most of the time it is met by some eye rolling and sighs of consternation by my friends, none who ever did this show choir thing, and certainly don't get my own personal fascination with it. But for my friend to reply to me with THIS quote - well, it's obvious some of the Burrough's magic does indeed transcend a crappy medium. I had described their show as "good show choir", and kind of a "Moulin Rouge" idea, in which modern rock songs are used to tell this depression era circus show (and that she had to get a load of the instantly inflated circus tent), and this was her reply - get a load of this:
"GOOD??? Only GOOD??? Out of all of the examples you've shown over the past few years, I think this is the BEST. Wow. Forget the circus tent. I get chills when I hear some bad-a** singers. I had chills for the whole thing. And it wasn't a set of cheesy renditions of rock songs. I daresay I enjoyed those performances much more than Moulin Rouge. Of course, I detested that movie, but whatever. Wow. And that female soloist with the voice that's just too awesome? She rocks. She totally rocks. I think she sang most of the 2nd half of the Circus/Welcome, came out on a cart or something. Someone book that girl already, for real. Awesome theme, awesome staging, awesome costumes, awesome singing -- genius, pure genius."
I will start by saying I pretty much agreed with the final results. I did feel quite strongly that Waubonsie Valley would be in first after prelims- their daytime show was truly one of the most powerful shows I've ever seen- their opener was undoubtedly the best song I've seen a show choir perform- followed closely by John Burroughs' final performance of Earth Song at the Cup in 2005. I thought they would be followed, in order, by John Burroughs, North Central, and Clinton. The finals order seemed pretty much right on.
I think in person, it was easily Burroughs' win. Their choreography was intricate, creative, effective, challenging to the performers on a physical AND emotional level, and purposeful. They actually were quite clean- cleaner than they were in 2005 or 2006 when I saw them, but, what really set them apart was that the choreography being clean wasn't the end-all. The level of investment from the performers WAS unparalleled on Saturday. There are moments in their show that transcend what I've seen any choreographer do with a show choir- while I don't think the design is perfect, I do think it's at a higher, more intellectual and aesthetically pleasing level than what most of us are even attempting to do right now.
Just my thoughts!
I agree whole-heartedly with both of these paragraphs. ESPECIALLY the first paragraph. Waubonsie's preliminary performance was out of this world. It was THE BEST show choir performance I have seen all season. I was extremely surprised along with countless other people who saw them live to hear that they were in third in the prelims.
As for Burroughs, I don't even know how to express what I saw. It just doesn't translate from a live performance to video (no... not even HD captures it) or even to our descriptions on here. It was truly touching. The people who were in Chicago (or have seen the show live) are the only ones who truly know the exceptional emotion and caliber of performance that Burroughs radiates.
I would disagree with pocavvbass10... Powerhouse's choreography is in no means stiff. It is extremely fluid and quite beautiful. Jen Oundjian is phenomenal. Calling her work "stiff" is like calling George Bush, "inteligent"... it never was or will be true.
While I think many people, myself included, are very excited for Brett and his program's success this past weekend, this wasn't the place to talk about it, even if people aren't paying as much attention to the FAME New York thread as one would like. Wouldn't that be akin to complaining that people are talking about the Grand Champion of a competition more than the 1st Runner-Up? FAME Chicago was simply a more high-profile competition than FAME New York.
We are all well aware of the success of show choirs who have traveled from California this year- as we have been the past few years. It's awesome, and as someone who has been following Burroughs since 2001, and watching Burbank since Brett started there in 2003, I'm enjoying seeing more and more eyes opened to the Southern California show choir circuit each year. One of the things many of us appreciate is the seemingly lower level of negative competitive spirit that exists there- please don't make us think otherwise by trying to draw attention away from Powerhouse's fantastic showing in Chicago.
Moving on,
It's been really interesting to hear thoughts from people watching the DVDs this week. Being lucky enough to have attended this competition, and being sad slash nerdy enough to stand in line that night for the finals DVD, I think I'm one of the lucky ones who has both perspectives.
I will start by saying I pretty much agreed with the final results. I did feel quite strongly that Waubonsie Valley would be in first after prelims- their daytime show was truly one of the most powerful shows I've ever seen- their opener was undoubtedly the best song I've seen a show choir perform- followed closely by John Burroughs' final performance of Earth Song at the Cup in 2005. I thought they would be followed, in order, by John Burroughs, North Central, and Clinton. The finals order seemed pretty much right on.
I think in person, it was easily Burroughs' win. Their choreography was intricate, creative, effective, challenging to the performers on a physical AND emotional level, and purposeful. They actually were quite clean- cleaner than they were in 2005 or 2006 when I saw them, but, what really set them apart was that the choreography being clean wasn't the end-all. The level of investment from the performers WAS unparalleled on Saturday. There are moments in their show that transcend what I've seen any choreographer do with a show choir- while I don't think the design is perfect, I do think it's at a higher, more intellectual and aesthetically pleasing level than what most of us are even attempting to do right now.
Just my thoughts!
I really agree with everything you said, only based on the little i've seen though... I just know that watching the HD vid of Burroughs opener... like you said the amount of emotional and physical investment that goes into performing like that is just incredible. The only way i can say it is like i did earlier. Something about the combination of everything, the vocals, the very EFFECTIVE choreography, the facial expressions and individual performances, and the way that you all just made it look so easy... Burroughs took an activity that is fairly straight forward, competitive, and entertaining in a Light sort of way... And they truly turned it into a piece of artwork... All of the elements worked together to make just an incredible experience...
P.S I really want to see a new WV video... any news???
P.S.S I'll stop gushing about burroughs now... but i DO LOVE POWERHOUSE!!!
It's just my personal opinion. It's how I see it, nothing more. I'm glad (I guess) that I made you laugh. I like the show, don't get me wrong. All I originally said was that I believe Clinton should have gotten Best Choreography and that I enjoyed their choreography more because it seemd much more like actual dancing. That's all.
well it would be silly for me argue, especially since i don't exactly have an objective perspective. I was just pointing out that i have never heard any one except you refer to burroughs as stiff, and certainly robotic...so it actually made me laugh to read that. laugh a lot.
we all have our opinions and i guess that is kind of the the point of scc, to share them. haha.
p.s. if there is any one from waubonsie on here, i am STILL singing your opener, amazing, Shana better give me my dvd back cause i want to watch it. =)
oh and to everyone complimenting our show, it truly means a lot, i'm sure especially to people like jen who have been working on this show for much much longer than we have.
It's just my personal opinion. It's how I see it, nothing more. I'm glad (I guess) that I made you laugh. I like the show, don't get me wrong. All I originally said was that I believe Clinton should have gotten Best Choreography and that I enjoyed their choreography more because it seemd much more like actual dancing. That's all.
well it would be silly for me argue, especially since i don't exactly have an objective perspective. I was just pointing out that i have never heard any one except you refer to burroughs as stiff, and certainly robotic...so it actually made me laugh to read that. laugh a lot.
we all have our opinions and i guess that is kind of the the point of scc, to share them. haha.
p.s. if there is any one from waubonsie on here, i am STILL singing your opener, amazing, Shana better give me my dvd back cause i want to watch it. =)
oh and to everyone complimenting our show, it truly means a lot, i'm sure especially to people like jen who have been working on this show for much much longer than we have.
i don't think i've ever heard anyone call our choreography stiff and non-flowy...
it's normally the opposite, it's not as clean cause it's not stiff so can't be clean...
ummm... okay...
haha whatever.
What I meant by that was that it seems way TOO stiff. Clean is great, but when it looks like robots are dancing on stage and there isn't any flavor, then I (personal opinion) don't see it as interesting. '05 was the closest to "dancing" that I've seen Powerhouse do. This is just my own personal opinion, though. Many people will say that Clinton or North Central or Waubonsie look robotic, but [in my opinion] they are just extremely clean without looking like things are TOO stiff.
It's been really interesting to hear thoughts from people watching the DVDs this week.
I agree! I find it interesting what translates well on a video versus watching a group in person. I also do believe that the quality of the video does make a big difference - both from an audio as well as a visual standpoint. You get a much different picture of a group from the HD clips, for example, than you do the FAME DVD, or even *shudder* from watching a choir on YouTube. Even the editing can make a difference.
I think in person, it was easily Burroughs' win. Their choreography was intricate, creative, effective, challenging to the performers on a physical AND emotional level, and purposeful. They actually were quite clean- cleaner than they were in 2005 or 2006 when I saw them, but, what really set them apart was that the choreography being clean wasn't the end-all. The level of investment from the performers WAS unparalleled on Saturday.
I think the way you articulated this is exactly how I feel but routinely have trouble conveying to others who have never seen the group in person. It's one thing to be precise and clean, but it's another to feel the music and convey it through performance. There is something about Burroughs - a kind of heart and soul that exists in the performances - that I have yet to see conveyed in quite the same way from any other choir. That doesn't mean there is no other group that sings as well or is as sharp with their movements, but there's just some sort of feeling I get from watching their group which transcends that. You can tell that a movement or facial response is genuine because the performers are thinking about what the lyrics mean and what the message is they are trying to get across - not just because the choreographer told them "next, put your arm out here like this."
Someone referred to what they are doing as "art," and I would have to agree. It is my hope that their high-profile grand championships over the last couple of years will send a message that there is more to great show choir than just performing a routine "perfectly;" there is a consciousness and a concern for the music - and how we use that to touch the lives of others is, I believe, an even greater achievement than just knowing a number by rote and executing it very well.
Alright agree to disagree I think there is just a Cali-Midwest difference there.
I think you're right.
Just to clarify, this is how it generally shakes down in California:
There are three types of groups and three different divisions for those groups in which you can compete at. The three group types are mixed, womens, and mens choirs. Just to clear the air, calling any group "Single-Gender" - in any region - is completely incorrect, as "Single-Gender" means something that relates to both sexes - not one sex. "Single-gender" would be more appropriate, though in California mens choirs never compete against womens choirs so it's not an issue. Anywho, a group is then categorized as "advanced," "intermediate," or "novice," and groups only compete with other choirs in their division. So a typical competition out here may have an intermediate mixed division, an advanced womens division, and an advanced mixed division, for example.
The terms "prep" and "varsity" are not used, and I think this is where it confuses some people - while some schools in the midwest may have a womens group and a mixed group, the womens group may be considered the "prep" to the mixed' "varsity." While there most definitely is a hierarchy of choirs out here, the divisions and distinctions between womens and mixed choirs are different, and thus they aren't really comparable in that way. Also, what determines a group's division is strictly skill level; we do not divide choirs by size, years in existence, etc. There are no "AAA," "AA," or "A" groups. Pretty generally, after competing for awhile, a group will get to know where it belongs. If a group that starts out as an intermediate choir and consistently wins first place, they will likely try their hand at entering into an advanced competition and see how it goes. Groups can definitely change division/status depending on director changes, trends, and overall performance from year to year. It's pretty clear, though, where groups stand and generally everything works out just fine.
I do not mean to belittle womens groups in any way whatsoever, but many schools do have a "tier," where the advanced mixed group is generally the most advanced choir in the program. I don't know how it works at John Burroughs, but at my school, for instance, girls who were not accepted into the advanced mixed choir still had a shot at making the advanced womens choir. And obviously the advanced womens choir was a step up from the intermediate mixed or womens choirs. So I am not sure I would call an advanced womens choir "equal" with an advanced mixed one, though they are obviously both of high caliber. And then there are girls who just prefer being in an all-girl choir, and may not even try out for the advanced mixed group. So just because someone is in an advanced womens choir doesn't automatically mean that they were "not good enough" to make it into the advanced mixed group. It may, however. There are a lot of variables going on! But - again, in general - I would maintain that yes, there is a sort of hierarchy in place, and the advanced mixed group is nearly always at the top.
While I think many people, myself included, are very excited for Brett and his program's success this past weekend, this wasn't the place to talk about it, even if people aren't paying as much attention to the FAME New York thread as one would like.
Well, I'm happy that everyone is happy for my success! Sorry, I couldn't resist.
sorry about that! I just assumed they were, because Powerhouse is obviousally your best group, and I bet the girls in sound sensations tried out for Powerhouse too (just assuming). So instead of prep I'll say not varsity. lol. my point was that it was rather remarkable that they beat out varsity choirs to make finals at one of the most competitive competitions in history.
We try out for the Vocal Music Assn. in general, and are placed.
And, I'm afraid you still don't have it right. Technically, we are BOTH "varsity" choirs. Equal.
ana i agree fully.... i felt burroughs just was so smooth with the choreo. and hitting everything perfect. I was also happy to watch WV on DVD. There opener was... wow. I thought there show was very good in finals and I wish i could see their prelim show. Gosh what a great comp.
While I think many people, myself included, are very excited for Brett and his program's success this past weekend, this wasn't the place to talk about it, even if people aren't paying as much attention to the FAME New York thread as one would like. Wouldn't that be akin to complaining that people are talking about the Grand Champion of a competition more than the 1st Runner-Up? FAME Chicago was simply a more high-profile competition than FAME New York.
We are all well aware of the success of show choirs who have traveled from California this year- as we have been the past few years. It's awesome, and as someone who has been following Burroughs since 2001, and watching Burbank since Brett started there in 2003, I'm enjoying seeing more and more eyes opened to the Southern California show choir circuit each year. One of the things many of us appreciate is the seemingly lower level of negative competitive spirit that exists there- please don't make us think otherwise by trying to draw attention away from Powerhouse's fantastic showing in Chicago.
Moving on,
It's been really interesting to hear thoughts from people watching the DVDs this week. Being lucky enough to have attended this competition, and being sad slash nerdy enough to stand in line that night for the finals DVD, I think I'm one of the lucky ones who has both perspectives.
I will start by saying I pretty much agreed with the final results. I did feel quite strongly that Waubonsie Valley would be in first after prelims- their daytime show was truly one of the most powerful shows I've ever seen- their opener was undoubtedly the best song I've seen a show choir perform- followed closely by John Burroughs' final performance of Earth Song at the Cup in 2005. I thought they would be followed, in order, by John Burroughs, North Central, and Clinton. The finals order seemed pretty much right on.
I think in person, it was easily Burroughs' win. Their choreography was intricate, creative, effective, challenging to the performers on a physical AND emotional level, and purposeful. They actually were quite clean- cleaner than they were in 2005 or 2006 when I saw them, but, what really set them apart was that the choreography being clean wasn't the end-all. The level of investment from the performers WAS unparalleled on Saturday. There are moments in their show that transcend what I've seen any choreographer do with a show choir- while I don't think the design is perfect, I do think it's at a higher, more intellectual and aesthetically pleasing level than what most of us are even attempting to do right now.
Just to set the record straight, Sound Sensations didn't make finals at Branson '05. There were semi-finals and then finals, and they made semis. Only three groups made finals.
However, I do agree that our girls outdid themselves at Chicago, and competed about as well as possible against some very good mixed groups; and that they're the best girls group in the universe! Objectively speaking, of course.
Dan
dan: you're the best!!!!! "we give you a DAN out of DAN!!!" we all love you so very much!
and allie: oh my god, i am laughing so so so so so very hard at your handle name. it should just be the last of the glamazon's, that's what joel called me. haha. but then you came!
brittany: hahahahaha i thought it was appropriate. "D
FAME Chicago 2008
