the truth about orchestral auditions

[Indybass091]

Life isn't fair. Different people are presented with different opportunities in their life. This doesn't mean that those who win auditions do so undeservingly, though. Starting with their first opportunity to play the bass, those folks either accepted or accidentally fell into the right opportunities that helped them to continue their musical growth. For new and better opportunities to come along, though, one must put in hard work(both on and off the bass) and develop discernment for when to say yes, when to say no, and when to travel somewhere and take risks. Sometimes you have to go out and make your own opportunities.

When someone is pre-advanced at an audition, it is because members of the committee have been made aware of the talents of the individual, usually through subbing, a previous audition, or general renown. These folks have already proven their capabilities of the typical first round question, “Can this individual play the notes without sticking out like a sore thumb?”

There is also the case where orchestras want their audition to be lucrative to an already established musician from elsewhere. Let’s say the principal bass of Good Pay Symphony has been playing there for 10 years, has some good students out on the audition circuit, etc. Rollin’ in Dough Symphony calls him up and says that they’d like him to come audition for their principal bass opening, as they know of his great work over in Good Pay. He decides that he is going to accept the audition, as they will advance him to semifinals automatically. It’ll be worth the time and dedication away from his current work that way, and he won’t face the risk of having a bad day in the first round, which could make him lose face amongst gossipy youngsters and potential students. Rollin’ in Dough Symphony also gets the guarantee that they have at least one qualified applicant whose work would mesh with their way of doing things.

In regards to the bassists who go and study with members of an orchestra before an audition: good for them. Different musicians listen for different aspects of playing and style, and going to learn what the committee will be listening for is a respectable way to keep ahead of the curve.

Yes, there are quite biased auditions out there, and there always will be. In the end, though, orchestras try to select the best candidate for the spot. Some people might not agree with the selection, most specifically other auditioners, but THAT’S OK. Music is subjective, and differing opinions are what give us the beautiful variety of styles within the orchestra world.

[Don Higdon]

Originally Posted by bierbass

I have to respectfully call BS on the "its who you know argument".... Just my 2 cents.

+1

[rodbass63]

This is no different than trying to get a job as a computer programmer, a mechanic, a lawyer, a doctor, or working at a library. It's not what you know, but who you know. You won't be able to change that, it's part of life.

Being at the right place at the right time, or even sheer luck certainly helps.

J.P Getty, the oil tycoon, said in his book when he was drilling for oil, it was luck that he found so many wells with oil.

CEO's of fortune 500 companies became what they are by knowing somebody from the board of directors.

[pedroims]

same in every job, hire a new CFO and next week will be a bunch of new directors, everybody will know each other in some ''grade''

[chriscrob]

Originally Posted by ekspain

ok, mostly, but studying with those particular players in that particular orchestra, couldn't that in a sense, be considered, or at least lead to rigging? It can be argued that human nature is like that. You like a person, he-she plays well, they've subbed with your group... taken lessons with you, etc...our tendency is to want to help that person. It sounds innocent enough, I've felt that way myself, towards certain amiable, well performing people that have subbed with my group.

I don't think this is rigging. This isn't JUST a contest to decide who the best bass player is...they're trying to fill a position. With someone who they know plays well, will get along with the group, show up on prepared/on time and be able/willing to follow instruction.

So when
player A: who is a half a virtuoso on the bass but completely unknown otherwise (except that they probably seem like a douchebag---arrogance and 1/2 virtuosity go hand in hand way too often)

and
player B: who is capable of playing all of the parts required of him but isn't as talented as player A but who they know is a stand up guy

audition against each other they are completely within their rights to hire player B. All I mean is, it isn't always favoritism when you hire somebody you know. The cool thing about people you know is that you...know them instead of hoping they're not lying or having an abnormally good day.

[ole Jason]

I'd go with player B. Honestly, as orchestras continue to get squeezed, I wouldn't be surprised if the whole audition process doesn't see a bit of an overhaul. In some ways it's just a big stroke of the ego for people and I understand why people enjoy the system but at the same time I don't think it always produces the best person for the job.

[ekspain]

Originally Posted by chriscrob

I don't think this is rigging. This isn't JUST a contest to decide who the best bass player is...they're trying to fill a position. With someone who they know plays well, will get along with the group, show up on prepared/on time and be able/willing to follow instruction.

So when
player A: who is a half a virtuoso on the bass but completely unknown otherwise (except that they probably seem like a douchebag---arrogance and 1/2 virtuosity go hand in hand way too often)

and
player B: who is capable of playing all of the parts required of him but isn't as talented as player A but who they know is a stand up guy

audition against each other they are completely within their rights to hire player B. All I mean is, it isn't always favoritism when you hire somebody you know. The cool thing about people you know is that you...know them instead of hoping they're not lying or having an abnormally good day.

sorry to disagree with you!
There should be a trial period folks! Like they do in certain European countries, particularly England. If they don't like you they don't keep you.

[lowfreq33]

I've gotten a lot of gigs where I didn't know a soul. I've gotten a lot where a referral was all the was necessary. It just depends on the circumstances.

[PaulCannon]

Originally Posted by chriscrob

So when
player A: who is a half a virtuoso on the bass but completely unknown otherwise (except that they probably seem like a douchebag---arrogance and 1/2 virtuosity go hand in hand way too often)

and
player B: who is capable of playing all of the parts required of him but isn't as talented as player A but who they know is a stand up guy

audition against each other they are completely within their rights to hire player B. All I mean is, it isn't always favoritism when you hire somebody you know. The cool thing about people you know is that you...know them instead of hoping they're not lying or having an abnormally good day.

Why wouldn't you offer player A a trial? Winning the audition (or passing a trial) doesn't guarantee tenure.

As for the last comment, I really can't make sense of it. How does one "lie" at an audition? Short of paying a better player to impersonate you, I don't see how one can cheat. I'm also not sure there's such a thing as an abnormally good day. On your best day, you still won't exceed your own abilities nor will you much improve upon your own preparation.

[Don Higdon]

Originally Posted by lowfreq33

I've gotten a lot of gigs where I didn't know a soul. I've gotten a lot where a referral was all the was necessary. It just depends on the circumstances.

How many of them were orchestra jobs on double bass?

[fergus currie]

I am still waiting for someone who got the job because they were drinking mates with the principal to stand up and defend themself here...
If this was the case, there should be more of them than you see round about you. Perhaps when a student of the principal gets a job then some alarm bells go off.

I got a job 18 months ago where the competition contained 3 students of players in the section. At least two of them were so sure they would get the job that the both appealed to the Ministry of Culture to challenge my position. The artistic director and the leader of the orchestra had to give sworn statements as to my appropiateness for the post in court!

I think Paul might be seeing ghosts but I'm not saying that there might be some actual instances of this happening. In my experience juries are quite objective as long as they are made up of a relatively large cross section of the orchestra. Three bassists on a pannel by themselves is quite suspect unless it's just for extra work in which case they might be more comfortable with a 'good student' rather than a hardened pro'.

Just my thoughts...
FC

[cold elephant]

I like the way we do it here in the UK - successful auditions result in a trial period. This means there's plenty of time for 'unknown' players and the extra musicians alike to show what they can do over an extended stretch of time. The section (and the rest of the orchestra!) gets to know each trialist in turn and everyone gets a fair shot at the job. Thinking back across all the recent appointments that I know of, across many different sections of the orchestra, in orchestras all over the UK, it seems that 'outsiders' and people who are known to the orchestra, young and old, are being appointed in equal measure.

The main problem of course is the amount of the whole process can take - anything from a couple of months to about 3 or 4 years, depending on various factors (number of trialists, the readiness of the relevant parties involved in deciding to come to an agreement, etc) and the only way the orchestra can know is once the trialists start coming in. On the other hand, a plus is that each trialist is able to gain experience through working with the orchestra, (especially useful for younger players like me!) hopefully making them a more rounded and employable musician the next time they go in somewhere. This seems little more constructive than the 'appointment on the day' situation in the States and continental Europe and so on.

One thing is for certain though, no matter which system orchestras use to appoint new jobs, they never end up pleasing everyone! Just my tuppence worth...

[lfmn16]

I haven't played String Bass in 30 years, but at one time I was serious and doing auditions. Unless the skill level between the best player and the person that got the job was extreme, I understand how this happens. Being a section player is about more than just playing the right notes the right way; its also about being able to play with a section and get along.

If you were making the decision and two players were at about the same skill level would you want to work with the person you knew, or take a chance on a stranger that you've never met? Would you choose someone with a little less technical ability if you knew they would fit in with the section?

Oops, should have read the whole thread. I see someone made this point.

[chriscrob]

Originally Posted by PaulCannon

Why wouldn't you offer player A a trial? Winning the audition (or passing a trial) doesn't guarantee tenure.

As for the last comment, I really can't make sense of it. How does one "lie" at an audition? Short of paying a better player to impersonate you, I don't see how one can cheat. I'm also not sure there's such a thing as an abnormally good day. On your best day, you still won't exceed your own abilities nor will you much improve upon your own preparation.

A trial would solve the problem for sure.

All I mean is that when you compare someone with known abilities vs un-known it makes sense to choose known if everything else is equal. And people lie on resumes for job interviews all the time. They could be hiding the fact that they were fired from their past 10 jobs (or the reason for it), a repetitive stress-related shoulder problem that will require surgery not long after getting the part or prevent them from performing a whole piece, plans to move away six months from now or any of a hundred other things...if they are allowed to pick their own pieces or given a piece to learn for the audition they could mask their inadequacies with a level of practice that can't be maintained (I'm no good at anything---but I have few things that I can play sort of impressively fast.) The point is that there are reasons to hire the guy who is known vs unknown that aren't inherently wrong or just "hiring your drinking buddy"...the other guy has essentially been auditioning for years and proven himself. And it cuts both ways, if he was a douche or a flake then this previous knowledge about him would have prevented him from getting the job barring some extraordinary ability. It's just the way the world works.

I am more speaking in hiring generalities than from specific knowledge about orchestral practices...but when I'm filling a position, I would rather have someone with a proven character AND the skills needed to do the job over someone with just the skills.

[lowfreq33]

Originally Posted by Don Higdon

How many of them were orchestra jobs on double bass?

None, I'm not an orchestra bassist. However I played trumpet for several years so I know about that world. The fact is with ANY job it doesn't hurt to know someone. Life isn't always about what's "fair".

[Jack Clark]

It seems to me that auditioning for a position in an orchestra is not the same thing as entering a talent competition. In the talent competition, sure, the player who plays best in the competition should win.

But a position in an orchestra IS a job, after all. That means working with other people in a long-term relationship is important, too—not just playing ability. So I can see a lot of things coming into play in an orchestra audition that do not come into play in a talent competition, e.g., work ethic, attitude, willingness to take instruction, dependability, general likability—lots of things. And when a guy is a long-time student of the principal, a lot of these things already are known to that principal, and through him to the rest of the section members. Just as in any business, it's already a foot in the door when someone inside knows you and your work and likes you.

[ekspain]

I hear quite a few of you saying that its "normal" or ok, or "just life", to practice favoritism. I don't disagree. But is it right? Thousands of people graduate from musicals per year, compared to the number of job posts that exist. We pay tuitions of up to 36k per year, sums that many of us can never hope to pay back.
Its not about being fair, its about what is right. The audition system needs to be improved and there should be trial periods. Favoritism should be weeded out. Anyone should have a chance. Thats the ideal.

[chicagodoubler]

ekspain- I'd personally LOVE to go back to the days when you studied with the principle, he gave you a chance to play for the conductor, and you were hired. It would simplify the whole process, save the orchestras tons of money, (auditions are expensive,) and remove some of the poseur jack@sses from the university circuit.

[Jack Clark]

Originally Posted by ekspain

I hear quite a few of you saying that its "normal" or ok, or "just life", to practice favoritism. I don't disagree. But is it right? Thousands of people graduate from musicals per year, compared to the number of job posts that exist. We pay tuitions of up to 36k per year, sums that many of us can never hope to pay back.
Its not about being fair, its about what is right. The audition system needs to be improved and there should be trial periods. Favoritism should be weeded out. Anyone should have a chance. Thats the ideal.

But would you apply your same suggestions to other businesses, private and/or public? Business, science, education and other students also pay tuitions.

What counts as "favoritism"? Is it really "favoritism" to simply have more pertinent information about one applicant than the other? Including if that information came from actual experience with the applicant? Should the principal of the applicant's orchestra section have to recuse himself from the selection committee because he already has relevant information about the applicant?

And the information can cut both ways. I mean, can you see this picture: The recused principal contrabassist talking to a member of the selection committee after Applicant A was given the job. He says, "You guys selected Applicant A over Applicant B? Ouch! Applicant A hardly ever was prepared for his lessons with me, he was almost never on time, he was arrogant, egocentric and he argued with my lesson assignments. I wouldn't want him back as a student, now I have to work with him in the orchestra? Applicant B, who was also my student, worked hard to get things right, was punctual and dependable, and took instruction eagerly. I'd work with Applicant B over Applicant A any day. I don't know anything about Applicants C and D, but I know Applicant B would have been good for us."

It's no solution to have a three-month trial period for Applicant A; Applicant B could be long gone to another orchestra in another city by then.

It seems to me that part of establishing a career in anything is preparing for it by taking every opportunity to let people already in the business get to know you and your various attributes for a position in that business—even while you're still a student. No?

[basteout]

Don't most jobs have trial periods already? Isn't that why you hear about people not being retained? Auditions are an imperfect process. If you make the finals of an audition and lose to a principal's student or someone who has already been playing with the section you can't do anything about that. That's life. At least be happy that you made it into the finals based on your playing. Don't worry about things you can't control. Also, it makes sense that students of principal/section players will do well in that Orchestra's auditions because they have been taught to play in the style of that orchestra already. We all know that certain orchestras have certain "sounds" and it's no coincidence that you'll often find that a large portion of the section has gone to the same school. In a profession where there are so few permanent jobs which are by default highly coveted there is no perfect/fair way to determine these things. I have met and worked with countless professional musicians, all excellent players, performers and teacher who, not only have never won a job, but will tell you straight away that they've gotten more performance opportunities through referrals and appointments than winning an audition. If you think the only way to be a bass player is to win an audition, then go practice your excerpts 24/7 and good luck. If you want to be a musician, quit whining and go out there and play music. Audition for things, network and create your own opportunities. You might find that you'll be happier doing a variety of things rather than being stuck in a section for the rest of your life. And believe me, some bass players feel that way, I've heard them say that. Obviously, talkbass is not the place to drop names but they exist. Can we just drop all this non sense already?

In terms of the high cost of attendance of conservatories/music schools, well education is a business and teachers need students to support themselves. That is a fact. Now, you have to hope that they will only accept students that are truly qualified but the level at universities varies so much. The professional level of a full time orchestra is extremely high and so is the competition for those jobs. Just because you get a music degree doesn't mean your entitled to a playing career with an orchestra like that. The standards are just so high. Think of it this way, not everyone who plays minor league baseball is entitled to making it to the majors, despite the fact that they have to toil for years on a very average pay scale, traveling constantly, and constantly trying to improve without any guarantee of advancement. It is your choice to study music and with that choice comes series responsibilities and an understanding that nothing is guaranteed, especially in this profession. There is no "right" and "wrong" there is just life. Anyone who shows up to an audition technically has a chance.

One last note on favoritism, one day you may be the beneficiary of it. Then let us know how you feel about it.