[Goose]

If there was a little blurb in the media kit that explained that the band is, and has been, a non-traditional scatter band for decades, I think it could help.

IMO if you need a blurb to "explain" your band, you are already lost. For many, many years the Stanford band was musically good and pretty funny. No explanation required. They are now neither. That is why they may need "explaining". The very long dialogs they insist on using for their formations clearly show that the ideas and execution behind these formations aren't "punchy" enough to work. Yes, putting together a performance that doesn't require rapt attention by the crowd to be appreciated is much more difficult, but that used to be the norm. If the band can't do that, their concept isn't going to work, as we are seeing.

[Goose]

If there was a little blurb in the media kit that explained that the band is, and has been, a non-traditional scatter band for decades, I think it could help.

IMO if you need a blurb to "explain" your band, you are already lost. For many, many years the Stanford band was musically good and pretty funny. No explanation required. They are now neither. That is why they may need "explaining". The very long dialogs they insist on using for their formations clearly show that the ideas and execution behind these formations aren't "punchy" enough to work. Yes, putting together a performance that doesn't require rapt attention by the crowd to be appreciated is much more difficult, but that used to be the norm. If the band can't do that, their concept isn't going to work, as we are seeing.