TubeNet

I know this post refers to a recent Double Bass audition, but the issues are the same for all instruments.

(BTW - the Cameron in the comments is not me )


http://peabodydoublebass.blogspot.com/2 ... -side.html" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank

PS - I hope this is not the outcome in any current or imminent auditions!

Best,

Cam

It's another case the furthers the point that the committees like to be over(t)ly political in the selection process. I find myself agreeing with bloke now in that the MD should simply come in and appoint someone if they come to a standstill.

Matthew Gilchrest wrote:I find myself agreeing with bloke now in that the MD should simply come in and appoint someone if they come to a standstill.

In our contract, as I suspect most, the MD has 51% of the vote. The author's point was that the MD doesn't step in and use sometimes for a variety of reasons if the committee is too divided.

From this point of view, on paper, the British system of then sending the finalists on to trials with the orchestra where they each do the job they applied for for a given length of time, should be the solution. Not only do you hear more of the players, you hear how they blend in and function musically with the orchestra, but also how they function socially on the job too. No one would want to sit next to someone they cannot stand for a life tenure...

Obviously this works on paper, and in some instances it works admirably to counter the situation described, however there are also numerous cases where the trials go on for years; a totally untenable situation for the orchestra and the applicants alike.

Ola

.

If I may say so without being a jerk, stating the obvious does not help readers one way or the other. Everyone knows that someone is going to eventually get the job.. That being said, I could definitely sympathize that it is not a good situation for the MD and a trial period for anyone they would seem fit is an excellent idea so that the relationships of those on the committee with the MD would not be compromised. Although I am a student, I have taken auditions, as well as an audition that was for keeps. There was definitely a winner decided, but had there not been; I would not have been mad. If you play to your potential, and don't settle for less, then you will reap what you sow. I can't say that if I honestly, truly felt like I deserved a job that had no decision I wouldn't be mad, but if I felt that way and that confident, not winning would not bring me down. No spectator can tell you what you deserve.. When it comes down to it, you are who you are. Work hard, take input wisely, and keep working. If you get content with how you are performing, chances are you are not as prepared as the person that eventually wins the job; they know that they have to keep looking for and fixing their mistakes.

I apologize for the long-winded post, but it gets frustrating to see the same things talked about over and over. Maybe I shouldn't read as much as I do on here, but this is one of the easiest mediums to find out about the tuba world. The only things that are worth complaining or arguing about are the things that matter most to you; if you have something worth while to contribute, then put your heart into it. Otherwise, you're taking away from greater accomplishments you can achieve.

On that note: keep on keeping on.

J Stowe wrote:If you play to your potential, and don't settle for less, then you will reap what you sow. I can't say that if I honestly, truly felt like I deserved a job that had no decision I wouldn't be mad, but if I felt that way and that confident, not winning would not bring me down. No spectator can tell you what you deserve.

I really like this point of view. It reminds me of something I once heard from a fine teacher at a very well-known summer camp for the arts...in regards to winning an audition, all you can do is put the work in to mold a piece (or excerpt) into what you want it to sound like (much like a sculptor molds the clay into what he/she wants it to look like). Someone else's like/dislike of that product is completely out of your control.

As long as you have put forth the effort into mastering your instrument (an extremely important "first step" that is so often ignored) and the additional effort into truly preparing the music so that you can play it as you wish to convey it, you can never truly "lose" an audition or other competition.

Todd S. Malicoate wrote:in regards to winning an audition, all you can do is put the work in to mold a piece (or excerpt) into what you want it to sound like (much like a sculptor molds the clay into what he/she wants it to look like). Someone else's like/dislike of that product is completely out of your control.

I disagree with this. Auditions rarely come down to individual likes and dislikes. Usually the winner is known because he happens to play well above the minimum standard the committee is looking for and is also a standout among those who showed up.

When the choice comes down to someone's likes/dislikes then you end up with no one chosen.

If you show up at several auditions over a good length of time and no one is liking your sculptor than maybe you need to make exponentially better sculptor.

While just about anything called "art" is going to be loved by someone, auditions are a time when a strong majority of peers must love your art. That is a much higher hurdle to get over than waiting for someone to come along and appreciate your product.

WoodSheddin wrote:Auditions rarely come down to individual likes and dislikes. Usually the winner is known because he happens to play well above the minimum standard the committee is looking for and is also a standout among those who showed up.

When the choice comes down to someone's likes/dislikes then you end up with no one chosen.

If you show up at several auditions over a good length of time and no one is liking your sculptor than maybe you need to make exponentially better sculptor.

While just about anything called "art" is going to be loved by someone, auditions are a time when a strong majority of peers must love your art. That is a much higher hurdle to get over than waiting for someone to come along and appreciate your product.

Point well taken, and I don't disagree at all with it under "usual" audition circumstances. Reference my comment about mastering the instrument first...I'm not talking about folks who don't regularly play with superb control.

The point of the thread, though, is the recent (last few years, anyway) high profile auditions which included a "who's who" of outstanding tuba or euphonium players but no one was chosen. It's difficult to believe that no one in those auditions played "well enough to win." It's also hard to believe that, under those circumstances, one player could stand out very much among such excellent peers. Perhaps that has been part of the problem?

For a ridiculous example, suppose you had an audition panel comprised of ten qualified vocalists who heard an audition final of Pavarotti, Domingo, and Carreras all performing Puccini's Nessun dorma. All three singers would undoubtedly be above any arbitrary standard one wished to create and worthy of "winning" the audition...but I'll bet that every member of the panel could say who they liked the best and could back their opinion up with any number of valid reasons. Personal likes and dislikes certainly would affect such an outcome, as I would also assert that the ten panelists wouldn't agree on who was best, either.

Perhaps it wasn't at all like this in the recent auditions this and other threads address, and perhaps no one really played well enough to merit the positions. I don't mean to give the impression that I believe auditions are like beauty contests in their overt subjectivity, but when all finalists in an audition perform at such a high level what is left but "I like the way finalist #2 played that phrase better" or "I prefer the more detached style presented by #3 in the first excerpt" or "I think the brighter sound in the high register of #1 is more appropriate for this ensemble"?

Sean presents the most valid point of all in his argument, though...if you want to win an audition, work harder and play better than everyone else. Consistently. Thanks for the down-to-earth reminder.

.

Auditions rarely come down to individual likes and dislikes.

I understand that it's important to appreciate the value of others' opinions, but if someone didn't like what they were producing, then hopefully they wouldn't go off of someone else's encouragement to lead them to success. We have all known someone to tell us we are doing well when we know that in actuality we are not. I implore those who chose to succeed in music to not always listen to all of those that will encourage you, but listen with a critical ear to your production and trust those who compliment to believe that they are telling you the total and absolute truth about your production.

Every person is susceptible to telling another person what they think they want to her so that they won't hurt them. I fortunately have had teachers that were not willing compromise their true thoughts. It is crucial to your own growth as a musician to decide for yourself what is best, and not just take what everyone thinks is good and mold yourself to that.

For instance.. Think of all the wonderful musicians that are unique and enjoyable in their own right. Just to name a brief few: Sam Pilafian, Pat Sheridan, Gene Porkorny, Demondrae Thurman, Adam Frey. So many musicians that we can idolize.. However, why should we try to replicate and emulate their sound? Just because someone may place them as the ideal sound does not mean that that is the perfect sound and approach to musicianship.

It's not about control or verbose expression.. It's about perfecting your craft constantly and being inspired by those who do the same. I respectfully disagree that it's not an individual's like or dislike simply because no one causes those to be great to do so; they take it upon themselves because they like and enjoy what they do. Anyone who has been to Oystein's masterclasses or recitals know that he loves everything about what he does with no regrets or regards to others' opinions. In my mind, he is fearless and performs with a clear mind and heart.

I could be wrong, but I can't imagine anyone who has truly loved what they do and won an audition actually considered the individual thoughts of a member of a jury. I honestly feel like they played the way they rehearsed with emotion and vitality.

.

.

If you can keep a steady tempo, picking the written tempo is choice, but favoring that particular conductor is just selling yourself short of musical expression. If you agree with that tempo, then by all means. But.. If the tempo is written specific, then take it at that tempo and use as much expression as you can. Tempo does not separate the boys from the men unless you can't keep a steady one. If that be the case, you're like a three-legged horse trying to leave the starting gate.

James,
You're right, though not at the level of your example.
At a much finer detail.

At the major level, If the committee wants to hear an excerpt at a different tempo, they'll ask for it. As much to see your reaction to change, as for anything else. In fact, you'll often ask for something that does NOT make sense, for the same reason.

A Music Director knows that they will often NOT be the conductor, and so rather than a specific interpretation, the ideal candidate will be flexible, not have the same musical taste necessarily as the Music Director or Principal Conductor.

I still stand by my assertion that it ain't rocket science. Every musician can have days when they leave doubts in listener's minds.

You simply have to impress the committee AND stand out from the other auditionees. Playing as well as all the other successful players is not enough.

The best advice I ever got from anyone was "Just play better than everyone else at the audition." Simple as that

Is it possible that a reason for a "no hire" audition is because management decides that they don't want to pay for a permanent employee? Maybe if the sub, who is not getting benefits or being paid as much, is working out fine. So the management decides they need to save a little money.

Stefan

Stefan wrote:Is it possible that a reason for a "no hire" audition is because management decides that they don't want to pay for a permanent employee? Maybe if the sub, who is not getting benefits or being paid as much, is working out fine. So the management decides they need to save a little money.

I have NEVER even heard of this happening. "The Management" doesn't even have a seat on this particular committee. The Personnel Director MAY be present at the audition, but only PRESENT, and has no input during the discussion process.

It is in the best interest of EVERYONE on the committee to hire someone. If you like the sub, you'd like to make sure that they are available, and not juggling jobs or committed to another group.

Like Woodsheddin' says, the thing to do is leave no question in anyone's mind who it should be, no matter how many people COULD do the job.

PeaBodyDoubleBass wrote:Here is the real message you should take away from a "no-hire" audition:

"The committee and music director were too divided by artistic opinion, personality conflict, or lack of mature decision-making to select one person from among the candidates. Because of the requirements of the modern audition system, our only solution is to start again."

Well, I think this quote sums up a lot of frustration many musicians have expressed here. It lays with at the committee which where it should be. Their committee didn't work, whether it was personality conflicts within the committee or real artistic disagreement: their committee failed.

The interesting thing is that the audition under discussion in the quote is for the Alabama Symphony, only in existance since 1997. The lack of finding a competent bassist for them would be more understandable if it were the Philadelphia Orchestra, the New York Philharmonic, etc. (BTW, The old Birmingham Symphony could play with the best orchestras anywhere.)

This does not preclude some of the auditiones' failure but considering the overall level of performance in today's auditionee's, somebody should play well enough to win most auditions.