I wonder why, then, no contest exists for Violinist Who Can Bow an Open A String the Most Times in a Minute? Or perhaps  Pianist Who Can Strike the Middle C Key the Most Times in a Minute? Trombonist Who Can Move His Slide Back and Forth the Most Times per Minute?

I've participated in a LOT of music contests over the years, as a soloist and as a member of an ensemble. The one thing that unified all these competitions was they required the contestant to play actual MUSIC, not simply demonstrate muscular control of one out-of-context aspect of playing an instrument.

Sorry, but this stuff just doesn't appeal to me in any way. The fact that a non-drummer with fast hands but not a musical bone in his or her body could win this contest speaks volumes to me.

No kidding.  Perhaps they're too busy making music?

That may change. One of the frequent winners in speed-eating contests is a tiny little woman, who promptly pukes after she wins the contest.

Hey, follow your bliss.

I just think time spent working on your groove is FAR a better investment than time spent on working on extreme, out-of-context speed. I want to make music on drums, not shoot for a goal utterly unrelated to anything musical. I mean, does 1100 beats per minute sound better than 1050?

No, but it does go to 11! 

I'd disagree. Yes, if you miss a note at your orchestral audition, you're dead. Then again, miss a note in an orchestral PERFORMANCE and that's a bad thing, too. It's a fiercely competitive field, with little margin for error.

That said, to play those excerpts both accurately and MUSICALLY is a true challenge, and one that the great players rise to. Playing Bolero well takes both physical skill AND sensitivity, don't you think? I'd think at any major audition, all the top contenders would perform without errors - it would be the ones who actually injected MUSICALITY into the excerpts that would be the standouts, don't you think?

They'd certainly be standouts at playing excerpts - which may or may not translate into being a good ensemble player, or playing pieces which aren't part of the audition repertoire.  There's a section of Porgy and Bess where the same figure that's in the popular excerpt is played, but in a different key.  Hearing someone nail the "excerpt" of Porgy only shows that they've mastered those few bars of music.  If they only have learned the excerpt, they - and the orchestra - are going to be screwed when they program "Porgy" and put the music up on the stand, and the newly hired section percussionist drops the ball when they get to the section in the new key.

Or, what if someone has locked themselves in a practice room, mastered all of the excerpts (including listening to recordings to get an idea of the proper tempos and phrasing), but they're not good at following a conductor?  So many orchestral percussion parts aren't all that challenging from a technical standpoint (or difficult in terms of note accuracy, IMO) - but to be played well they require a performer with strong ensemble skills.  It always struck me as strange that a committee would search for a good ensemble player by hearing them play something by themselves.

I'm not saying that orchestral auditions are devoid of musical considerations, and it's certainly not an exact parallel to WFD - but in these auditions at least a few (in my mind critical) musical considerations are set aside, at certain stages of the process.  I don't mean to start a tangent discussing the merits of orchestral auditions.  It's just that criticisms of WFD often imply that drummers are the only individuals who would ignore musical concerns for the sake of a competition, but I don't think that the rest of the musical community is completely guilt free on that count.  No community of instrumentalists (violinists, pianists, trombonists, etc.) is free of guilty parties when it comes to getting caught up in technique, or speed. 

It's not exclusive to drummers.  There may or may not be dedicated "speed contests" for these other instruments, but technical facility - including speed - is often part of the criteria for judging musicians.  It's just not always as obvious.

Come on sir. This is a good discussion. No reason to make the cuts without actually having something substantive to contribute. But yeah we can play ballads too and comprehend your almighty spirit based groove. This business about all of us being village idiots is a myth perpetuated over time, and not nearly discredited enough.

What I have noticed beyond question, is that drummers who go on and on about this stuff in a supremely negative way (not those that actually debate in the concerned manner of Mr. Acrolite for instance) are usually those who could never win one of these contests in ten thousand lifetimes with 800 billion hours of practice. Again, I hate to be harsh. But facts are facts.

I was serious about the name change.  The "goes to 11" thing?  Yeah - a joke.  Lighten up, Francis.

Good point...I'm 16. I've got time. But if you're raising that belt over your head past middle age, anyone would have a reason to wonder.

And Dave...you also contributed this one...


Should I lighten up about that one too?

Three slams in an hour isn't a joke...It's a statement. No foul man. With respect, just stand behind it. And my comment about ardent detractors is something I stand behind. You may not be one of these people. But it is something I've noticed about the lion's share.

When I make forum comments on a subject I know something about, then to me it's serious. Others must feel the same way, considering the insane opinions that float around both sides of this issue. In my experiences I have attempted to demonstrate some rational debate behavior  and as one of the current visible guys in this thing, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the same rational rebuttal and/or respect. All this to the side stuff, and the non contributing jokes are a big waste of time, and don't contribute to a topic that shows few signs of going away...even after all this time.

Is this reasonable? After all ...is it reasonable that the other opinion is supposed to be regarded with biblical solitude, while my stuff is responded to with a condescending lighten up?
With respect again, I just think this other stuff has gone on for so long that some don't even know they are doing it. Well, there's nothing wrong with making the appropriate attitude corrections.

You're 51 years old, and I bet you play great, which is why I am betting the benefit of the doubt is certainly in order.

Absolutely. 

Good luck with your future contests.