TubeNet

I've heard A LOT here lately about orchestra auditions and that people aren't advance to the finals. Is this a trend? Are orchestras looking for the "perfect" player. My two cents: If orchestras wanted this "perfect" player that can play every note in tune, in correct style, and never misses a note - Why don't they just hire a machine?
With Orchestras hiring these machines, how is it affecting the orchestra? -- Machines cannot convey emotion - could this be why orchestras are dying?

just some questions that have been looming here lately

Jeff

Here's what I think: If I'm going to spend quite a bit of money on one person, this person better be good. And I mean REAL good. Missed notes and what not are natural. Congratulations, this means you're human. But to me, to spend X amount of dollars on one person that will be there for quite sometime is a big investment. Everyone here is always saying to try many tubas until you find the right one for you. Well I see it as the same way for these orchestras. There are many GREAT tubists out there who deserve these jobs but these orchestras want to find the one that fits THEM. I hope this kind of makes sense....

Ralph

Disclaimer: I'm a disinterested, ignorant bystander to all of this stuff. I have no special information. I have been told, however, that I have a brilliant grasp of the blindingly obvious.

I see two possibilities here:

1. Because a symphony player, once hired, is virtually un-fireable, orchestras are scared out of their pajamas to hire anyone. If that's the case, maybe it's time for orchestras to re-think their tenure concept.

2. Orchestras, as a means to bolster their reputations, are consciously or subconsciously playing "hard-to-get". It seems to me that it has become de rigueur to turn up one's nose at the first offering. After all, if the orchestra X was too good to take someone from the first pack of auditionees, then orchestra Y might be seen as having lower standards if they DO take someone from the first group.
________________________________
Joe Baker, who suspects some combination of the two is at work.

Jeff Keller wrote:Machines cannot convey emotion

Maybe this is your answer.

Rick "thinking older and more experienced players usually have a better understanding and command of the role of emotion in music, and that these are the guys winning the big auditions and making it to the finals" Denney

Because a symphony player, once hired, is virtually un-fireable, orchestras are scared out of their pajamas to hire anyone. If that's the case, maybe it's time for orchestras to re-think their tenure concept.

"Orchestras" didn't come up with, nor do they even care for, the tenure system. The players turned to it as a way of being able to make a living and not being summarily fired whenever the maestro needed a way (whether they deserve it or not) to make the orchestra properly "subservient", or needed a scapegoat. Nothing is too outrageous when you're talking egos.

In an orchestra, at the major or regional level, the standard is to AT LEAST play the part. If you can't cut the part, no matter how hard, there are PLENTY of procedures in place to fire a musician for cause. To convey emotion and play well with others, beyond that, is why they don't use machines. And why are the standards set so high? Because there are SO MANY musicians. If you think being a tubist is hard, try being a clarinet player or a flutist...

that s/he is a "compromise" hire

I've never known a single person who has ever won ANY job that didn't think they absolutely deserved it. And probably did.
But

the spotlight is on him/her and s/he better not mess up once?

is the name of the game, no matter which part you're playing. Stress, YES. The standard IS very high, but you don't put paying people in the seats if you "mess up" very often. That part of the dynamic is very much like professional sports. And all the things about performance are actually very much the same. But the opportunity to make art at that level just blows everything else away!