(Opinion) Rethinking Ensemble: it’s time to rebalance pipe band judging

Editor’s note: pipes|drums welcomes all fair perspectives and opinions. Sharing information and constructive dialogue is at the heart of the publication. As in all fair democracies, free speech and the free exchange of ideas are central to progress. Our competitive art can move forward only by asking questions, listening to answers, respecting opinions, and trading ideas.

Please let us know if you have an opinion that you would like to express fairly in an editorial. We are always pleased to hear from our readers.

For those who prefer watching to reading, here’s a video of our opinion piece. There’s a slightly longer text version below.

Rethinking Ensemble: it’s time to rebalance pipe band judging

“Ensemble” has recently become the watchword of pipe band judging.

That fact alone signals how much the art form has shifted. For decades, the competitive structure placed disproportionate weight on piping precision. Two piping judges, one drumming judge, and one ensemble judge reflected the era of technical precision defining excellence.

Today, performance practice has evolved more quickly than the judging model that governs it.

“Ensemble” has always been interpretive. One judge’s vision of ensemble excellence will never perfectly align with another’s.

That’s not a flaw. It’s the unavoidable reality of evaluating music. As pipe band performance grows more sophisticated in orchestration, harmonic design, and musical architecture, the importance of informed and balanced ensemble evaluation only increases.

The Royal Scottish Pipe Band Association has clearly recognized this shift. Its Adjudicator Panel Management Board is moving to accredit more Ensemble judges, and rightly so. Ensemble judging does not require mystical credentials. Like piping and drumming adjudication, it demands many years of competitive experience, disciplined listening, and a fair and an open mind.

In many ways, Ensemble judging requires a broader musical perspective than either piping or drumming alone.

Piping and Drumming judges assess objective criteria: tuning stability and accuracy, tonal quality, rhythmic unison, execution, tempo control, phrasing consistency. These are measurable standards.

Ensemble judges evaluate integration, assessing how the sections function as a musical whole. Ensemble judges interpret the emotional effect of the music – what moves us musically.

“While piping and drumming critiques come from the brain, ensemble assessment comes from the heart.”

While piping and drumming critiques come from the brain, ensemble assessment comes from the heart.

The Ensemble mark is the tie breaker. It is often decisive. So, if that makes sense, why does the Ensemble critique remain structurally underweighted?

The 2026 World Championship performance of Inveraray & District’s “Dream Valley” medley illustrated the direction towards the musical. For certain, the band was technically formidable, but what captured the most attention was the orchestration, the texture, and the dynamic architecture of the performance. It felt like a watershed moment for competitive pipe band music.

Judging structures must evolve with what pipe bands have become over the last hundred years.

Rather than maintaining the traditional format of two Piping judges, one Drumming judge, and one Ensemble judge, and understanding regular judging panels of eight, ten, or more aren’t yet feasible, here’s a more balanced regular format that’s in tune with the times:

• Two Ensemble judges, one with a piping background and one with a drumming background, both assess the band as a whole with emphasis on integrated musical performance.
• One Piping judge who’s focused primarily on objective execution, such as tone, tuning, unison, and technical accuracy.
• One Drumming judge focused primarily on objective execution within the drum corps.

Each judge’s score would carry equal weight in the final result. (In a single-event competition, the combined Ensemble mark would be the first tie-breaker, and combined Piping and Drumming scores next. In multi-event contests, the overall Medley placing [light years more difficult than an MSR] would break the tie.

“This new approach recalibrates the system toward music while preserving the rigorous assessment of accuracy. It also removes the implicit structural hierarchy that unduly weights the pipe section over the drum corps, and focuses more on the band as musical whole.”

This new approach recalibrates the system toward music while preserving the rigorous assessment of accuracy. But it also removes the implicit structural hierarchy that unduly weights the pipe section over the drum corps, and focuses more on the band as musical whole.

Following the RSPBA’s lead, associations worldwide should reduce outdated barriers to Ensemble accreditation. Experienced piping and drumming judges can and should be trained to assess full band musical performance rather than being confined to sectional silos for a decade or more before being permitted by wizened veterans from another era to be an Ensemble judge.

The same thinking applies to MSRs. If the MSR remains, treat it for what it is: a structured mini-medley of three interrelated compositions. Encourage orchestration, internal balance, and harmonic imagination. There is no rule requiring MSRs to be musically predictable.

A revised structure would also improve the listener experience. Bands would be encouraged not merely to avoid errors but to create compelling musical narratives. Competitive pipe banding thrives when it balances athletic precision with artistic creativity.

The art form has moved forward. Judging must follow.

What are your thoughts? We welcome your opinions and observations via our Comments feature below.