YouTube Symphony

[Matt G]

Seems a bit hard to judge these entries in regards to a final decision. There are some vast differences in production quality. These differences could be a disservice to the better player. IMO, Taylor Stokes is overcoming the largest deficit in recording issues, while Andy Chester is overcoming the least. That isn't to say anything about their playing, just the recording environment itself.

YOUtube should have shelled out the extra coin and had these folks record in an identical environment. "Real" orchestras do the same.

[Spencer_Brown]

I voted for Andy Chester. He really did some GREAT playing!

[ztuba]

I disagree with the recording environment issue. Andy Chester is a noticeably cleaner and IMHO better player. I am not a fan of him announcing to MTT that he is floyd's student prior to them hearing him play, but he is the better of the three I think ..and that one guy with the out of sync audio .. I smell editing.

[Steve Marcus]

In Chicago, WFMT promoted the YouTube Symphony and offered the use of its fine performance studio for applicants to record their entries (for free?).

I believe that I read that Interlochen offered a similar courtesy.

Nevertheless, Andy chose to record in Floyd's studio itself. The dry acoustics in that room certainly didn't help Andy's sound. So what you hear is the raw real thing, which is a fine performance.

[tubashaman2]

.

[Badgley]

In a real audition, these 3 people would not have made it past the 1st round

What are you basing this statement on? How many audition panels have you sat on where applicants were dismissed based on your "honest opinion"? Once again the Tubashaman has shown his ignorance and lack of tact...congratulations.

You stated that you wish you would have submitted an auditon video, but the fact of the matter is you did not. Now you have the audiacity to go on a public forum and state the three finalists are not worthy, and you yourself, had you taken the initiative and submitted a video, would have done any better. HOW DARE YOU! These three took the iniative to put themselves out there, to be judged by anyone and everyone all over the world. You did not.

Where do you get off saying they would not have made it past the first round in a "real audition"? It seems to me that the YouTube Symphony was a "real audition" and that these three ARE the finalists. Your ignorance at times is comical, but unfortunately this time it went beyond comical and is now malicious. My advice to you is keep your mouth shut, practice, and next time an oppertunity like this presents itself to you put up or shut up.

Despite what our opinions are, these three are the finalists, do your part, vote for which ever you believe perfromed the best and leave it at that. Do not take anything away from these three, they worked hard, prepared their submissions, and are now the finalists.

[Biggs]

In honest opinion,

In a real audition, these 3 people would not have made it past the 1st round....Andy MIGHT have....makes me wish I would have done it now

Reality check: By virtue of your failure to take part in the audition process, YOU (James M. Green) did not make it past the first round. It must be pretty embarrassing for you to fail to qualify for what you seem to feel is a "fake" audition.



edit for AP Style

[tubashaman2]

.

[ztuba]

there were but they were not looking for euphonium for the orchestra itself ... if you would have looked at the other category and browsed the videos when they still had the video 1 and 2 postings listed you would have seen a very fine euphonium artist. IMHO

[Matt G]

Thanks to any of you who voted for our (rather young and new) principal clarinetist. Ana won! And if none of you voted for her after I asked you to - she still won!

I voted for her. In fact, I feel that this type of format benefits her well. Not only is she a good player, she also appears to be a good looker. That type of bias is difficult to overcome. However, I don't feel bad, since she sounds like a fine player regardless of her winning the genetic lottery.