“Give me success or take this desire away from me. One of the two.”
There is an article from Boston Magazine currently making the rounds of various musician friends’ and colleagues’ Facebook and Twitter feeds.
Called simply “The Audition” it follows the journey of one percussionist as he prepares for and takes the audition for a position in the Boston Symphony.
There’s nothing really new in this harrowing and heartbreaking story for someone like me- I’ve spent too many years in and around conservatories and orchestras watching friend after friend go through this process to be shocked by anything in it. Thankfully, though, it is a humane piece of writing that I think gives a pretty good window into the huge toll the modern American audition process takes on musicians. It goes into quite a bit of detail about just how hard candidates work to prepare for an audition at a major orchestra, the sacrifices they make and the impact the system has on those involved.
And so, with this article as exhibit A, case study one million and one, I’m going to hop on my Vftp soap box and publicly call for an end to the system. It is a life-ruining, soul-destroying monstrosity. In any other field, it would qualify as torture. It is a dehumanizing and damaging process that extracts an untellable toll in human suffering on musicians across the country. Far from being the perfect system for choosing an orchestra, I would say it’s closer to being the perfect system for driving people out of the field, for destroying their self-confidence and for absolutely eviscerating their love of music.
Isn’t it time the AFofM stood up and said that this is no way to treat our union brothers and sisters? Isn’t it time that orchestras said we want no part of such a hurtful and wasteful system?
The Current System
1- The application. Send a CV
2- The tape round. More and more orchestras are using a tape round to limit the numbers of candidates they have to hear. In the case of the BSO percussion job, applicants had to submit an uninterrupted and unedited video of themselves playing a series of excerpts.
3- The first round. Generally held behind a screen. A huge number of well-trained musicians play for a few minutes then most are sent home.
4- The second round. Generally held behind a screen. A much smaller number of players repeat the process. All be a handful are sent home.
5- The finals. Varies from one orchestra to the next whether or not the candidates play behind a screen. The process often becomes more intense and less formal as the committee tries to choose between the final candidates
The case for the current system
1- It’s fair. By making everyone play behind a screen, it’s only the playing, not the gender, pedigree or skin color, being judged.
2- It forces players to push themselves to a level of achievement far beyond what they learned in conservatory. It’s an absolute focus on excellence and perfection.
3- It gives the best candidate the best chance to win the audition, just as the best Olympic athlete has the best chance of winning their event.
The case against the current system
1- It’s not that fair after all. Screen or no screen, there are plenty of examples of people in major orchestras who certainly had a hand getting there. Maybe they studied with a principal, or are related to the concertmaster? Maybe they studied at the local conservatory? Any system can be gamed and manipulated. A supposedly fool-proof system like the screened audition process just makes it easier for people who do game the system to get away with it because the existence of the system gives those abuse it the perfect defense. “Preferential treatment for my mistress? Impossible! It was a screened audition– I had no idea it was her! There was simply no way I could have helped her advance.”
2- It actually constricts the musical development of aspiring orchestra musicians. By driving people to work towards an inhuman level of technical perfection, expecting them to practice the purely instrumental challenges of a tiny number of orchestral excerpts for countless thousands of hours, you make it impossible for them to develop their knowledge of the repertoire and their awareness of playing styles and historical context to anything like the same level.
3- It identifies the people who are best at playing an audition, but not always those who are the best at playing in orchestras.
Thoughts-
One of the subplots of the Boston Magazine piece involved the story of Lee Vinson, who had won the BSO percussion job several years earlier but was denied tenure after three years. Mr. Vinson won the job- he clearly had what it took to succeed in a screened audition process, and yet, just three years later, in spite of his best efforts, he was out of a job:
““In the beginning, I was a deer in the headlights,” Vinson says. He was stung by some of the criticism directed at his playing. He tried to block it from his mind, but found it difficult. “Then the performance anxiety comes back because these people aren’t telling me what they think,” he says. “They just want to glare at you. I mean, really, you just want to turn around and scowl at me and that’s supposed to help fix this whole thing?”
“At the end of Vinson’s first year with the BSO, he fell one vote shy of earning tenure, so he was put on another year of probation. He started asking his colleagues how to “fix” his playing, but one person would tell him to try one thing and another would suggest he try something else entirely.”
It’s dangerous and unfair to speculate about a situation one hasn’t observed in person, but to me, the case of Mr Vinson seems like a case study in how the screened audition process often fails even those who survive it. Mr. Vinson must have played astoundingly well in his audition to have won the job- his technical skills on a huge variety of instruments must have been literally off the charts, and yet, in the day-to-day world of playing in a busy orchestra, he found himself unsure and insecure.
This comes back to my second point above. One would assume that anyone who wins a major job would have to be a great musician as well as a great instrumentalist, but it’s simply not always true, and the fault is not with the individual player, it’s with the system. Again, I never heard Mr Vinson nor had the opportunity to hear him play, but we all struggle from time to time in professional situations- there are those times when you know what you want or need to do musically, but your skills, preparation or concentration let you down, and there are those times when you don’t know what you want or need to do musically. The description of Mr. Vinson’s situation sounds like the latter situation (especially after the first tenure vote impacted on his confidence)- he needed guidance in “knowing what to do,” rather than focusing on being able to “do what he knew he needed to.” It is a far more dangerous place to be in.
The time he spent with the BSO after being told he’d lost his job with the orchestra was “the worst year ever,” he continues. “I was like a fetus on the couch. Balled up bawling for weeks on end.”
The modern American audition system doesn’t allow a lot of room for individuals to develop a fully rounded artistic personality in the key years between leaving school and winning a job or missing that window. To the extent that it doesn’t, it fails them and the institutions. Mr Vinson’s predecessor at the BSO, Frank Epstein, said much the same thing:
“Some of that may simply be professional pride, but some of it may reflect his belief that younger musicians are moving the music in new directions. Epstein says the current audition process rewards a different kind of player [emphasis added]. There used to be at least a little room for flair while auditioning, he says. Back when he went before the judges, he got creative and performed a piece he’d composed for bass drum and cymbals.
“These days, he says, “The technique on the instruments has grown, but what hasn’t grown is the innate musicianship, the interpretive abilities of players. Sometimes that is the most difficult thing to measure in an audition.”
Let me come back to the metaphor of an Olympic competition. To compare winning an audition for a section violin to winning the 100 meters is apt in all the wrong ways. Looking for the violinist who can sprint up and down the fiddle faster than anyone else may be an interesting exercise, but what you want in an orchestra is someone
- Who can win gold for sprinting up and down the fiddle at exactly the same speed as the other 15 players in the section, in the same part of the bow, at the same dynamic.
- Who can hear and match what their colleagues are doing.
- Who can balance their contribution to the volume of their section with the dynamic levels of the other sections of the orchestra
- Who can anticipate what their colleagues are going to do.
- Who can sight read new works with energy and insight.
- Who can follow a conductor.
- Who can follow a soloist.
- Who can inspire the people around them.
It’s not that there aren’t people in orchestra who can do all those things, of course there are, but with so much at stake, shouldn’t people be selected, at least in part, on their ability to do them? The system also doesn’t serve people well who survive the tenure process. The upshot of the screened audition system is that once someone wins a job, in order to bring their skills in all of these areas up to the same level as their audition chops, an orchestral musician spends their first five or so years learning the repertoire, learning the job, learning how to play in ensemble at the highest level. Perversely, for many friends and colleagues, just about the time they have become a consummate orchestral musician, the window seems to close on them ever winning another job.
Imagine if the NBA were to adopt a similarly irrelevant and restrictive system? Imagine if you were an NBA general manager, and you had to choose your team without seeing any of the prospects actually play basketball. Instead, imagine your prospects could only demonstrate their fitness to play at the highest level by enduring a number of abstract skill tests with no room for error. Perhaps they might have to make 20 different shots 20 times in a row each. Anyone who can’t, doesn’t get to play in the NBA. Then, to make it even more absurd, nobody from the team can actually watch the player take those shots- you can’t see how they play, how they prepare for each shot. You only know if they made the shot.
So, the current system doesn’t serve those who can get through it, like Mr. Vinson. One can get through the audition then struggle in the gig.
Likewise, some of the very best orchestral musicians I know don’t excel in auditions for one reason or another. I have friends who are astounding instrumentalists, consummate artists and complete musicians who might just have a phobia about one shift in Don Juan, which they’ve never missed in concert, that keeps them from ever knowing the security of a permanent position. That’s crazy. I’ve known players who’ve made the finals again and again for jobs, who would have been one of the brightest stars in any orchestra they might have joined, who’ve never won a permanent position. This is deeply unfair to them, and to the organizations that miss out on their talents.
Finally, while the screen is supposedly there to protect the candidate, I think more often than not, it protects the members of the committee. I think that if someone has prepared for years to audition for an orchestra, they should be able to see the faces of the people who hold their destiny in their hands. There ought to be maximum accountability on all sides.
Having lived in the UK for most of the last 10 years now, I can confidently say that the system here is better and more humane. It achieves more consistently high results from the player pool, and makes better use of resources. While the specifics of how the system work vary from orchestra to orchestra, essentially the audition here is just the first step in a process. The purpose of the audition is not to pick a winner of a high-paying job for life, but to identify those candidate who are capable of playing well enough to do the job in question. Successful candidates are then offered a “trial,” which may last anywhere from one gig to a few years. There may be more than one set of auditions for the job, and the trial process goes on until the orchestra, both players and conductor, are convinced they’ve found the right person for the job.
It is in every way a fairer and saner system, for all its flaws.
But don’t listen to me. I knew early on that the orchestra audition circuit was not for me, and I also understand that defenders of the current system often say that only those people who have succeeded in a national audition fully understand the benefits of the system. So don’t take it from me.
I leave you instead with a quote from a fried of mine who retired as section principal from one of the world’s greatest orchestras about ten years ago:
“It was the auditions that did me in,” he said, “I just couldn’t sit there anymore and break the hearts and destroy the dreams of so many people who played better than I did, when I knew the system wasn’t giving them a chance to show what they were really capable of.”
________________________________________________________
What do you think? Have you taken orchestra auditions? Was your experience anything like that described in the Boston Mag piece? Perhaps your partner or relative has been through the audition circuit and you’ve seen how it affects them? Do you think the system really works or do we need a change?
Please share your thoughts!!!
_______________________________________
Part II with some follow-up thoughts is here, but read the comments to this post first.
I suggest anyone who makes a comment like “throw the screen in the trash” read the following article. The screen is about more than just anonymity.
http://www.nature.com/news/musicians-appearances-matter-more-than-their-sound-1.13572
@TR
I’m not militantly anti-screen- I do think it has its place and can help to keep the process more open to candidates of all backgrounds, builds, ages and colors. On the other hand, I don’t think it is by any means a guarantee of fairness. Use it for one round somewhere in the process, but otherwise, I think the cause of fairness is better served through more transparency.
I loved all of this article, except for the arguments against screened auditions.
While it would be marvelous if we were an unbiased enough world not to have screened auditions, that is simply not the case. Orchestras are still mainly run by white males, and they have demonstrated that they will overwhelmingly choose white males to fill orchestra roles. It was not terribly long ago a certain European orchestra got in a lot of hot water for its egregious mistreatment of women–one woman in particular–and we need to do everything we can to protect women and people of color in this process.
It’s easy to forget these biases exist when you are a white male. I am one and it has taken me a long time to come to terms with the fact that many of my white, male colleagues are sexist, racist bastards.
The screened audition doesn’t “protect” the judges, giving them plausible deniability; it protects the players from the vagaries of human prejudice.
While I agree with many of the arguments you make here, I must point out that the very fact that the first example you have of how someone can game the system is to be someone’s “mistress” is EXACTLY the reason we need screens in auditions. As a young woman who plays a very male dominated instrument, every time I win any job I must field rumors and worse from individuals who believe I received the job on a basis of my looks instead of my playing. As a result, I greatly appreciate the screen, the carpet and any other form of anonymity that I can point at to show it was my playing that won me the position. I think it is easy to forget these things still happen if you don’t encounter them on a daily basis.
Yes Vienna Phil also has screened auditions until the final round same as America. It’s at that point or the tenur decision that they reject all the women and foreigners. So the screen is no help there.
In the UK you don’t have screens and yet in many orchestras there is gender parity. Everyone just accepts women play as well as men.
So the main problem is the sexism in the orchestras, not the audition process. Screens dont help that much.
It’s not the sexism that is the problem, its the generalization and prejudice of someone that is different. As a women you are still a minority in orchestras, so many people will then point out exactly that (because its new and unusual – and then scary!). But imagine if you come with your own style of playing, your sound, etc. If you then like avant garde music as well, you are just too far out. If you then might get the job, everyone would think you are different, and that’s why they won’t talk to you. This applies to any conservative or institutional settings…
Blah, blah, blah. The best find a way to perform, I’ve found. Try being a soprano for a while; see how difficult auditions can really be.
There is no way for this process to not be hell. The reason is not the cruelty of this specific system- the reason is that too many tens of thousands of people train themselves to scary levels of consistency playing music on their particular flavor of bizarrely sculpted piece of wood or metal. There are tens of thousands of them, there is economic room for only hundreds and decreasing. The only solution is for talented young people to have courageous mentors who tell them that just because they are potentially talented enough to be professional performers doesn’t mean they should go for it. If they can picture themselves satisfied in any other career, music teacher, music business, instrument manufacture and repair, other art forms, business, or engineering, they shouldn’t try because it is a Noah-level-flooded job market. The only reason to enter this insane ratrace is because you absolutely cannot stand the thought of being anything else but an orchestra musician. In which case you are kind of a closed minded person and I’m glad I’m not you.
Music is like life, we have our strengths and our weaknesses. If we find we are “competing” for the same goal, we are kidding ourselves. If we are like a sportsperson, it’s because we know that competition exists only on the outside – with the crows who sit up on the fence and don’t really have any involvement or any deep connection. It’s a superficial world if you let it be like that. So take heart and lots of it, because it takes guts to do what you do. So many people wish they had the guts to be so “out there”.
There has to be a better system. I experienced youth orchestra auditions as a percussionist and those were bad enough.
Auditions have changed because times have changed. In the “good old days,” one could arrange to play for a conductor, and if he approved, you had a job. Travel difficulties made it difficult to get a position in another city, and, perhaps most important, cronyism was the rule of the day. It was common practice for friends, family, students, etc. to get jobs.
It is worth remembering that in major cities, the symphony or opera was not the best way to make a living in the music business. Commercial work was where real money could be made. There were no auditions for that work; it was about who you knew.
The human element corrupts auditions. Blind auditions removes some of that element, but if people are determined, they can undermine the process by block voting (usually to reject), or by individuals expressing opinions as to the acceptability of one candidate or another.
At least in the US, fair, impartial auditions behind a screen have given us women in principal chairs on instruments long considered the private domain of men, particularly in the brass, and in the woodwinds and strings as well.
Trial periods are always a good idea. I don’t know about following the conductor, though. If there is a delay, the musicians are following each other, a collective guess as it were; most conductors seem to be blissfully unaware of this fact.
Blind auditions are cold, hard, ugly facts of life. I would love to hear of a better way that ensures fairness for everyone.
Musicianship is what matters-forget technically “perfectionistic” robots–the flair, the style, the innate true musicianship is lacking in the states where money trumps everything, and folks are easily impressed by the unimpressive.
The orchestral audition process in america is a joke/laughing stock–they are looking for machinistic robots who blast out their ideal of “perfection.” Rather than true artistry. Listen to old recordings and listen the sterile, dry, machinistic “music” currently. sad. Peace out my bassoonists
Auditions are a bear and can be unjust. I’ve succeeded at many and failed completely at many more. I have found that, even though the system is harsh, preparing for auditions CORRECTLY keeps my skills sharp and helps me to continue to learn. Once you accept that the audition process in the US “is what it is” you can treat it more as business and less personally. I am fortunate enough to be in a position where I can take only the auditions I want to, but I still strive to make my way up the food chain in order to advance the level of my play and to keep the performance level at my current job better than the day I won it.
Some additional thoughts:
I am pro screen for all the obvious reasons, but having sat on a panel I know it in no way guarantees anonymity. I could easily identify my colleagues from their tone and playing characteristics. Having read through CVs I was able to guess level of experience, nationality, teacher of various other players…
Both here in Uk and USA having musical flair as well as high end accuracy does make you stand out as a candidate – don’t lose hope. Besides would you want to play with an orchestra that doesn’t go for musicanship?
The UK trial system is just as demoralising. With trials going on for years, being under the microscope for that length of time is crippling. You do the job for that length of time, yet you are not perceived as good enough to actually be given the job. You are probably being paid a lot less than someone would get if they were in the job – you feel (rightly) taken advantage of. Your ‘friends’ that you eat, drink, tour and basically live with are your panel – judge, jury and executioner. They hold your future in their hands. And yes – there are the unexplained glares from the conductor and colleagues – should you make a mistake, accidentally play pp rather than ppp, just happen to not notice a bowing or a note length…
Living with this pressure becomes the norm. You question yourself every concert, then every day, every rehearsal, then every last note you play you analyse.
You may or may not get booked again, be dropped at a moments notice without explanation. Your work, income, social life all gone in an instant. Your face may not fit even though you do a fantastic job. Over the long term this is so destructive – it’s almost better and more humane for it to ‘be done quickly’ a la Macbeth.
Surviving the audition and trial process is tough, but if you can and do, you learn a heck of a lot from it, and then you’ve got the mettle to do the job at hand which in many ways is not easy.
I wish the profession were nicer, more based around music as an ideal, but it’s not: it’s fiercely competitive and there are more musicians than there is work, it’s so rarely about the music and yes, there are many who are just clogging up the system.
This is the reality.
Well, I’m a rare 16 year old classical percussionist. I have to beg, borrow and still time on these amazing instruments that normal families could never afford. I have to use my imagination to practice at home because anyone who owns a timpani or Marimba has them locked up so tight that an army couldn’t reach them. I have to set aside my training every summer when the schools shuts down and locks them away, while a violinist or clarinetist has their instrument to play every day. Yet I’m expected to be ready to play what ever they throw at me and expect perfection. Talk about unfair advantage. I have dreamed of being a classical percussionist since I was 6 years old. However, after reading the articles mentioned and this commentary, I do not know that this process is for me. I never knew that it was this way and can not even imagine putting myself through this process. I listen to NPR and all the talk about how kids are pulling away from classical music and how it is withering on the vine. How they need to bring it back and get musicians excited about this fading art-form. However, If what is going on here is true, it’s no wonder why it is dieing. They are killing this art and I do not have to be a rocket scientist to see it clearly. It appears to me that if your not absolutely perfect note for note, rhythm for rhythm, you might as well hang it up. I am not going to allow them to destroy my love for music because they expect me to push myself to the brink of insanity trying for perfection that doesn’t exist. My thought when I read that article was, they are insane! “I want someone to be so brilliant that there’s no question.†— Mark Volpe, BSO managing director, I’m not sure this mentality is helping me want to bring classical music back into Vogue.
Hi Zachary-
Thank you for your very thoughtful comment. I hope many in the industry will read what you say about the audition process and think about what the current model means for the future, for people like you, who are supposed to be the foundation of professional orchestras for the next 40 yaers.
I hope you won’t let this discourage you- there are many paths to a fulfilling and rewarding life in music that don’t involve going through the audition process, and it’s becoming more diverse all the time. People start their own groups, compose their own music, commission, setup festivals and projects. There are still many freelance opportunities, but, most importantly, there are more ways than ever, you can control your own music destiny.
Finally- I’m really sorry about your difficulties in finding instruments to practice on. This should be a solvable problem. At my old orchestra in Oregon, we set up a scholarship program which funded instrument rentals for students who couldn’t afford their own instruments. I know many other orchestras and music centers/schools have similar problems. There are also many generous and kind percussion teachers and people who run percussion ensembles all over the country who I’m sure would help you out. You might have to ask several people and endure a few “no’s” before you find someone who can help, but I’d be frankly stunned if there really was nobody around who could help a serious young player to find instruments to practice on in the summer where you live. You might try looking up percussion message boards, FB groups and societies, too. Someone will help you.
Good luck!
Ken
Thanks Ken, I have been working very hard in my craft, and have been in a local youth orchestra since I was 11. It has been slow going due to the challenges of gaining access to my instruments and very few youth in my area are exposed to these instruments at the age of 11. I have been the only percussionist who auditioned for them and they have college students step in to play because I am all by myself. I couldn’t help but think that I would have sold my soul to the devil just to have a few hours under the tutelage of Mr, Vinson, Mr. Frank Epstein or Mike Tetreault. I have watched countless hours of youtube videos with Frank Epstein at the helm of a timpani and was so deflated to hear that he walked away and never looked back because he couldn’t stand it if someone made a mistake. To think that he didn’t step in to help mentor Mr. Vinson or any other percussionist blows my mind and goes against everything that I have been taught about being in an orchestra as a team. I understand that at this level which I am not at yet, they do expect a lot but instead of working together and helping each other, this barbaric mentality appears to have turned the Orchestra percussion pit into shark infested waters, engaged in a feeding frenzy. The current state of affairs seems to have created an elitist attitude that is destroying the very foundations of classical music. I may only be 16, but surely If I can see this, how can adults be so blind. I have always been told that I am mature beyond my years but something has to change or they will run the orchestra into extinction and have no one to blame but themselves. Just an FYI, I have been documenting my musical growth and Journey on YouTube since I was 11, feel free to come meet me, not in person of course but through my channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1D8JtFUoAjzxyZwdYRdCow. Thank you very much for your words of encouragement, there might be hope yet for this crippled system that I have dreamed about for so long.
Thanks for a very good and thoughtful article. I agree with you that the audition system needs changing, but I’m not sure what would be better. The existing system is better than the days of the Good Old Boy’s network with cronyism and nepotism being the ruling principles. The screen has done much to eliminate that. And in those days, not only could you be hired for the wrong reasons, but you could be fired just as easily for the wrong reasons. Union rules about both auditions and employment conditions generally have been linked in negotiations and have improved our lives considerably.
Technical competence is a must – we don’t survive in the profession if we make mistakes – but it shouldn’t be the only goal of an audition. The much more difficult and subtle measure of where the commas, quotation marks, apostrophes and periods of the musical phrase go is a highly personal and subjective thing, but agreement about it is what makes the difference between a pickup band and a great ensemble. The only way to see if the candidate is simpatico is to work in the orchestra with them. I see this as a necessary step in the final round.
Ultimately, until something can replace the screen as a means of eliminating, or at least reducing, personal bias in the initial selection rounds, I don’t see a way to change the basics of the existing system.
When I was first breaking into the pro level during the late 50’s and early 60’s, the percussionist Elaine Jones in the SF Symphony was a remarkable breakthrough. Not only was she black, she was, by gawd, a woman! Today the makeup of all but the most conservative European orchestras show a wide diversity, proving that musical talent and compatibility is not the province of any particular group of people. Unfortunately, some individuals sitting on committees feel otherwise, and the procedure needs to account for this.
I just went to an audition another day finding out that I got last chair for bass when everyone else was using open strings (I am an 8th grader but I hate blind auditions). Most of the bassists there show no emotion through what they are playing and the excerpts they chose didn’t fit the criteria for the group. The solo was from Mahler’s Symphony No. 1 Mvt 3 but that wasn’t an excerpt that they wanted to hear. Also I had played all of the excerpts in 3rd or 4th position when I can but clearly they didn’t notice how much work and thought I put into it. Also I always took a deep breath and made sure that I sounded like a professional. Clearly I should have not gotten at least last chair. Last year I auditioned and got 6th chair and the bassist that was last chair was far more superior than I was and the rest of the bass section. If they had seen the position work I had done for the excerpts and my emotions throughout them I wouldn’t have gotten last chair. Also the excerpts they had chosen were easy but I hadn’t practiced those because I thought they were jokes but I guess the joke was on me because I probably have many unprepared bassists in my section AND have a bad soloist for the Mahler piece (which I had planned to audition with). I also asked prior to their audition to play the Mahler solo and they either played it an octave lower or had terrible thumb position technique and tone. It’s sad that the scales also had recommended or required fingering that I didn’t follow because I didn’t want to allow myself to use open strings but oh well. At least I had gotten in and tried my best with the solo. I really hope the first chair bassist knows what’s up because if they don’t I think the conductor would not like the outcome of it because it’s such an important solo and the conductor would most likely want a soloist who demonstrates emotion in the solo and expect the octave higher.
I only took a handful of regional orchestra auditions soon after I graduated from Juilliard because I simply couldn’t afford to continue taking them. They were all held behind a screen. In one, I made it to the final three out of several hundred and stayed in a hotel for a week since there were multiple rounds. One of the finalists was a local with a student flute that couldn’t play to save her soul. All I could imagine was that some southern old boy network was working its magic. Luckily she didn’t get the job. I think they allowed her to get that far in the audition process to perhaps appease whoever she was connected with. Extreme “small town” corruption…a real slap in the face to the few hundred flutists who came for the audition. So in that case the screen was useless…she was easily identified by her junior high school level playing.
I know a world-class pianist that plays as soloist with major orchestras. Once after a concert, he went out to eat with some of the musicians from one of these orchestras. They told him that orchestra auditions are a complete joke because they always know who they want in advance and how to get them, screen or no screen. In this day and age, someone could easily hide a small Wi-Fi camera somewhere in the room/hall and see the person on their smartphone. Or they could have the person that they want to win wear a GPS tracker under their clothing. So many ways to beat the system.
The best way would be to select a handful of finalists and have each of them perform with the orchestra for a few days. Have ALL orchestra members vote because that would make it as fair as possible. I have seen too many damn principal players do whatever it takes to get their students hired and it’s not right. They eventually retire and the orchestra is stuck with a mediocre section thanks to one corrupt idiot. I have heard about phone calls being made to conductors which also resulted in musicians getting hired, but in most of these cases the player would have been hired regardless. It is so cutthroat that musicians end up feeling compelled to help stellar players in various ways to insure that they get the job.
Hi Bill
Many thanks for your comment. I’m not sure it’s fair to dismiss auditions as a complete joke. I have many friends and colleagues who sit on panels who take it incredibly seriously and bend over backwards to be fair. There will always be musicians who are known to the committee who might get put straight through to the finals, but those people are also taking a risk. I’ve known many players who were long-time first call subs with major orchestras who did get put through to finals but then had a nervy audition and not only didn’t get the job- they lost their position on the sub list.
There is corruption, of course. This usually happens when too much power is concentrated in the hands of a single principal player or conductor, but I think many, probably most, orchestras try to be fair and to always put the music first.
My real problem with the American system is that it doesn’t measure how candidates play in the orchestra, which is ultimately the most important thing.
In an earlier comment I read some one that said something like auditions are good the way they’re, that the problems are the applicants that don’t do the job, of recording, working with metronome and I add tuner. Let me tell you my opinion, I am principal in a major orchestra in Latin America, yes I guess I won’t be taking seriously, because that is the impression I have gotten in US where I studied seven years up to master and performance diploma, and in EU whee I gig quite a bit.
The orchestras and committees don’t know what they want or don’t say it. I have taken auditions in US and EU and got to second rounds, played really and sent home. When I asked for feed back they say, your sound this, your style that. I ask myself, as committee you can’t ask the candidate to try something else??? Wouldn’t the audition committee save time and money to everyone if before the audition they say, we want this type of sound, this excerpt to be play like this, at this volume, with a leading tone higher, lower, softer, louder, etc or any example like that??? I have been party of audition committee, and I stopped players and asked them can you pay a bit darker brighter louder, softer, romantic, classical style, etc.
If you’re part of a committee of an international orchestra and want to find the best player that fits your orchestra why don’t save time and money to everyone being clear in what you want??? In advance of course, our if possible our even the they of the audition tell people what you are expecting to hear, because the idea of a “good refined player” varied from person to person, some one likes the one who follows strictly what is written on the page others like the musician to add something to it, others like extreme dynamics other reduced dynamics, frontal attack, delayed attack, etc… so you may have the best recording best metronome best tuner, practice 12 hours day but if you don’t know what the orchestra is looking or they don’t tell you, your chances to get a job or moving forward in the audition are really small.
That to me is the main orchestras don’t know what they want and if they know they don’t say it. If you want Daniel Stabrawa level for your concert master audition say it you will be saving time and money to everyone….
Hi LM
Thanks for a fantastic comment.
I agree very much with what you are saying. The current system confers a huge advantage on the students of current members of the orchestra. One shouldn’t have to know a secret handshake to get a job.
This is why I think the trial system is so important. Yes, have an audition behind a screen, but then see how someone matches their stand partner’s sound and intonation in rehearsal. Are they in the right part of the bow? Are they breathing? Listening? Giving feedback in an audition can be illuminating, but better yet is to see what a musician can contribute in the orchestra.
Your comment about Mr. Stabrawa made me chuckle! He is in a class by himself!
Hi Keen, thanks for yuour nice answer. I understand the trail period, but if you have in front of you a really adaptable person, who can fill in the sound of violin or trombone no problem, no matter the piece he or she are prepared and know where the music goes etc. But they dont advance in the audition because they interpretation is no what the jury wanted to hear so they didn’t make to the end get trail.period??? That is why I said, orchestras need to be more clear of what they want to hear before audition day, or stop applicants and ask for different things, ask for video tapes, and if you are no fully convince with it ask them to do it again with recommendation and sent it in the next week, so what you see better capabilities of the applicant. One in an audition in latinamerica, this famius musician from there was at the jury of a really famous orchestra. I made to the finals with 24 years old just fresh of my undergraduate in San Francisco. That 14 applicants for one position, he stopped me during excerpts and asked me, have you play this symphony, this opera? I said no, so he explained three different types of interpretation and he asked to do them all. I found that it was so relaxing, because they wanted to see what was behind the technical ability… that should be applied I think in first world class orchestras. Well love the article and have a great day..
Some very valid points, but as an active orchestral and jazz musician I would state that these points don’t take into account the “Wild West” that is auditioning in any setting other than the orchestra. These settings allow people in positions of authority to hire or fire musicians for whatever arbitrary reasons they see fit, most of which have nothing to do with music (or even sound). I haven’t been hired because I was too young, sat down while I played (bass), played French bow, etc, and as a white Male I’m sure I don’t even know the half of what some of my female or non white colleagues have dealt with.
Visual bias is, in my opinion, the single greatest flaw of the performance of instrumental music. One only needs to look at the stats related to gender parity prior to the use of blind auditions to see the massive issues of allowing visual bias to dictate hiring.
Is this post still active? I’m really loving the conversation going on in the comments. The Boston Magazine article makes annual reading for me whenever I take a major audition. As a Canadian-born, American-trained, UK-based musician I’ve definitely seen both sides of the argument re: which audition system is preferable and I’d like to throw in my two cents.
Even as someone who’s won a major training orchestra position in the UK right out of my American master’s degree (namely I was the first to achieve this without having set foot in the country prior to auditioning), I can’t be invited to UK auditions. All of my auditions since 2020 have taken place in the continental European countries, and I think we’re missing a trick by not looking closely at what I believe to be the BEST audition system: the French.
In France the process is as follows (mostly):
1) Submit a CV to secure your place at the audition. EVERY submission is given an audition, regardless of skill level or experience.
2) Every single candidate plays a pre-audition first round on a separate day, which comprises of 1-2 challenging solos +1-2 standard excerpts. A selection of these are advanced to a main audition the next day. Held behind a screen.
3) Those who advanced play a round comprising of some solos, mostly orchestral excerpts. Held behind a screen. A few are selected to advance to the final round.
4) Final round is usually (though not always) an excerpt round played in the orchestra with the music director conducting. From this round one winner is selected and put on a probationary season.
The excerpts are pre-divided per round, so candidates are able to more accurately prepare for the task at hand. The excerpts will be somewhat standardized to a degree (there may be more Messiaen than usual, but that’s just the territory), but in general the lists are shorter and more manageable than an American list, which will often include way more excerpts than actually get played on the day (some of which may not even be part of the orchestra’s repertoire, as has been pointed out).
I think what this allows for that most UK orchestras don’t is that ANYBODY can be given a chance. In my experience, UK orchestra auditions are less of an entry into the profession and more of an exclusive invitation-only procedure granted to the select lucky few who’ve had a lot of freelance work experience. One of my big frustrations while I was in this training orchestra was being among colleagues of mine who would be earning trials during the contract that they could transition into after the fellowship, whilst I was unable to even play at an audition.
I for one love playing behind the screen, I don’t think it’s that much of a deal breaker but I could be alone in this opinion. What I would like to see as the major change going forward is more transparency in the CV round. Especially in the UK (and I’m biased, as I live here), not nearly enough applicants are invited to auditions and the orchestral committees almost exclusively refuse to give any precise indication as to why. The job descriptions in the vacancy postings never detail the required amount of professional experience for applying to the jobs, and this unintentionally denies opportunities to brilliant players who otherwise didn’t get to study with the right person in order to have this access.