New York Phil: To Tape or not To Tape

robert_white · Heavyweight Member Joined: 19 Feb 2003 Posts: 1583

Hi Everyone,

If you've sent in your stuff for the New York Phil Assoc. Principal spot, you probably know by now that they are accepting taped preliminary auditions as well as scheduling live ones. (Kudos to them, by the way, for mapping out what the list for prelims and semis would be!)

Anyway, I'm wondering if any of you have thoughts re: pros and cons of either. Anybody know someone who's been advanced in one of their auditions based on a taped prelim?

Here's hope for an interesting discussion!

Bob

Peter Bond · Posted: Sat Feb 28, 2004 9:50 am Post subject:

At least 80% of the people who attend auditions for these positions have no business being there, which is to say, they are not qualified or don't play well enough to be considered. By using a tape round, the committee is trying to accomplish three things.
1) Save unqualified players the considerable expense of traveling, hotels, etc. just to be told "thank you" after 3 excerpts.
2) Audition players who are indeed fine, but whose thin resume or lack of experience would otherwise prevent them from
getting a hearing.

Peter Bond · Posted: Sat Feb 28, 2004 10:07 am Post subject:

*oops*
to continue:

3) Avoid wasting time for the committee. Major symphonies are extremely busy and auditions are very difficult to schedule. If there are two or more positions open in a year, and the conductor that is out of town a lot, it can get very complicated.

In my experience on committees listening to audition tapes, we invited anyone with a glimmer of promise, choosing to err on the side of inviting too many rather than deny a talented musician. I should add that our listening was also anonymous; only the personnel manager or auditions coordinator had the key matching numbered tapes with names. We didn't know who we were hearing or inviting. I suspect that the Philharmonic is pretty much the same.
If you don't have real command of the excerpts (is your Ballerina's Dance a "crapshoot"?), or are otherwise unsure of your prospects, send the tape.

Peter Bond

wiseone2 · Posted: Sat Feb 28, 2004 10:25 am Post subject:

tanda · Veteran Member Joined: 19 Jan 2004 Posts: 177

[ This Message was edited by: tanda on 2004-02-28 19:23 ]

MrClean · Posted: Sat Feb 28, 2004 4:02 pm Post subject:

They had taped prelims back in '93 for the "combo" 3rd/Associate and 4th vacancies. The reasons/processes Peter gave above are accurate.

It is an option for those who can't or do not want to fly out to NY three times (pre, semi and final) - I made a tape last time which was accepted (unusual for me as my tapes were at the time often not - I am a much better "live" player).

I'd say if you have the time and money, do it live; otherwise, make a tape, but it had better be near perfect.

J

robert_white · Heavyweight Member Joined: 19 Feb 2003 Posts: 1583

Thanks Peter and Jim for your comments!

trombapaul2 · Posted: Sun Feb 29, 2004 8:43 pm Post subject:

I will always make the effort to go "live" unless a pre-lim tape is
mandatory. Frankly, I don't like playing to a mic. Like Jim, I'm a
better live player. Microphones are simply too unforgiving. Even
a perfect "Ballerina's Dance" can sound bad on a tape or CD.
Besides, I look forward to the adrenaline and the anxiousness
(notice I did not say nervousness!). If we didn't have family in
New York and Jersey, I'm sure my wife would insist on my sending
a tape but this way, she gets to see her sisters while I go play.

Paul

_________________
"NEVER practice...ALWAYS perform" (Bud)

"NEVER look at the trombones...it only encourages them" (R. Strauss)

[ This Message was edited by: trombapaul2 on 2004-02-29 23:46 ]

thegambler · Regular Member Joined: 20 Dec 2003 Posts: 35

I find that just the "simple" activity of making a tape can improve my playing greatly. When making a tape, one tends to be super-picky. If you can work with the frustration, you can get something great out of the experience.

I think it's great that the NY Philharmonic is taking tapes...after all, in addition to saving an applicant alot of money, it provides a barometer for where your playing (at its best) really stands against others.

MrClean · Posted: Sun Feb 29, 2004 9:28 pm Post subject:

I have to disagree with that. It may prove who has access to the best recording equipment and the time to make an absolutely perfect tape. It will not necessarily give me a picture of what you will do live in a pressure situation.

However, I believe NY is right in giving applicants the option of doing it - just glad it is not mandatory.

J

trumpetmike · Posted: Sun Feb 29, 2004 10:56 pm Post subject:

Thanks for the insight here, this has been a fascinating read so far.

I am intrigued, if the recording is terrible (due to equipment problems, rather than performance problems), will this go against the player?
I am all in favour of recordings being allowed, but can't help but feel that it benefits those players who have got the time and facilities to put together a "perfect" recording (through multiple takes, in a studio) rather than the "once only" approach of a live audition.
Having done a few recording sessions recently, you can create wonders with a few multiple takes and cutting things together. This is assuming you have the time and equipment to do so.

I remember talking about ths with my university tutor and his attitude was basically "any fool can do it in a recording studio, it takes a certain kind of fool to do it live." With apologies for his sense of humour

Kevin Good · Regular Member Joined: 08 Oct 2003 Posts: 68

Peter Bond's comments are right on. It has been my experience, on both sides of the screen, that roughly half the people that show up for auditions have no business being there. In spite of that, it IS their right to show up and play (at least in the auditions I've been involved with). That's fair, and we try to respect the time, effort, and expense these players have invested in coming to play for us. It should also be said that in a typical audition, any of the final 3-5 players could probably fill the position and do a good job. Reality dictates that we can only hire one person, so we try to find the best one we can.
Taped auditions are a good idea for all the reasons already cited, but it's important to see them as a kind of preliminary screening round. It's true that a well-produced tape can help get you "in the door" but I feel it's not a good idea to send a tape unless it represents the best of what you can do. It's understood that the benefit of recording (multiple takes, equalization, reverb, editing, etc.) an audition will be used by those who have the option to do so. When an audition comittee listens to a tape, we assume that this is the best (in terms of both playing and production) that the candidate can provide, and for that reason, we tend to listen a bit more critically than when we hear someone live.
Of course, the final rounds are always performed live, and the differences show up quite clearly when we hear the players one after the other. In some instances we have also been able to bring the players in to play with the orchestra and actually "do the job" for a week. This also helps make the decision pretty clear, in terms of sound, ensemble, and "head focus".
The process is far from perfect, but it's the best we've come up with.

Comments?

KG

trumpetchad · Posted: Mon Mar 01, 2004 7:25 am Post subject:

It seems to me from that what Mr. Clean and Mr. Good are saying is that it is quite to someone's advantage to go and play live (if this is wrong, I apologize). I think that perhaps a committee will listen much more carefully and critically to a tape, simply because you have had the chance to record, say, Mahler 5 over, and over, and over again to get it absolutely pristine. Of course, with the recording techology of today's age, it is possible to come up with a spectacular sounding recording.

A follow-up question to the technology point is, how many people actually submit an "un-edited" tape? With the splicing and recording capabilities of computer software programs, it is certainly possible to come up with an absolute perfect recording. I suppose this goes to the integrity of the player, and in the long run, should they advance, would hurt them.

Another question would be, because of the reasons stated above, what are the chances that a taped audition would advance to the next round?

MrClean · Posted: Mon Mar 01, 2004 8:10 am Post subject:

As Kevin stated, committees generally listen much more critically to taped auditions and will dismiss something that it not close to perfect, the idea being, with unlimited time and takes, what you sent them is the absolute best you can do under ideal conditions. I never spent that much time on tapes - figured they wanted an accurate representation of what they could expect from me in real-world conditions (boy was I wrong...). Also, the more time I spent trying to get everything note perfect, the more my tape sounded like I was trying to get everything note perfect - loss of spontaneity, fire, etc.

Good luck!

J

_Don Herman · Posted: Mon Mar 01, 2004 9:18 am Post subject:

While not in a real good position to contribute, I have had played a couple of auditions for a community group in the last couple of years. (I did poorly; I tend to get nervous and shake too badly to play until I simply freeze up and nothing will come out. Fortunately, I'd been playing with the group, subbing all parts at one time or another, so they knew I could do OK in performance, solos and all. It's just auditions that cause me to completely crash and burn.) In the course of asking for help, I did receive some interesting (to me) comments:

1. If you send in a tape, it'd best be of "perfect" playing. Sound, intonation, rythym -- everything. Judges tend to assume everybody will turn in a perfect tape if at all possible. Poor playing on tapes show a lack of care and/or concern on the part of the player, and if he can't make a perfect tape then what will the actual playing level and/or commitment to the group be? Tapes tend to be judged much more critically than live. I think the others (MrClean, Mr. Good) have said it well -- with the chance to retake and replay as many times as needed to get it perfect, why wouldn't you (and everybody else) do so? Furthermore, things such as projection and just how truly rich your sound is (or isn't) is hard to tell from a recording. Finally, the playback equipment may not always be the best, and is most certainly out of your control...

Aside: I've spoken to very few who actually "judge" tapes, but of those the emphasis was on the player, not the tape (CD/ whatever) recording quality. I think really bad recording quality can hurt, but a great recording (i.e., well mastered by a great studio engineer) may not help, or help you stand out.

2. Splicing is generally frowned upon. I've seen several tape audition requests (I have NOT participated, thank you very much, have just read the requirements out of morbid curiousity) which explicitly state that there be no splices in the middle of excerpts. They are looking for a recording with dead silence, or audible clicks which may indicate a "retake". Heaven help you if you bump the stand or do something "clickish" during the excerpt -- better tape it again.

3. Better make durn sure the tape matches your abilities. If you really can't play Petroushka or Brandenburg live it's not a good idea to put it on the tape. I also think that, if you can do a decent (if not "perfect") job of it and think you might have a chance, it's better to play it live. I've seen and heard evidence (don't know if any real player can confirm) that those coming in off a tape are judged more critically in the first live audition.

Example: A great player (#1) I know only slightly couldn't make the first round audition and sent a tape. A friend (#2) of his did, and they both made the second round. They met before the 2nd round and both were sort of nervous. I was not there, but a friend (great player) was. He knew them both. Player #2 (no tape) went first and tripped up a few things. They asked him to play again and he did it uch better (opening nerves). Player #1 tripped over one of the same spots, was not asked to play again, and was out of the round while #2 advanced. All three agreed #1 was a better player, and in fact played better overall. The listener (union rep or something like that), who sat through the entire day's auditions, felt he saw repeated bias against those coming into the 2nd round from a tape. They were judged more harshly, in his opinion.

FWIWFM - Don
_________________
Don Herman/Monument, CO
"After silence, that which best expresses the inexpressible, is music." - Aldous Huxley

cronsell · Regular Member Joined: 24 Aug 2002 Posts: 65

I have a question for Jim or Kevin: When you listen to the tapes, do you listen to the same one more than once? Do you rewind to have another listen of something that caught your attention? If so, that would seem like a good reason to go to the live round, where critical listening is real-time. Whenever I hear a group or recording for the first time, I don't notice the tiny little errors that I will after the twelfth listening.

no_tone · Posted: Mon Mar 01, 2004 8:22 pm Post subject:

Another point to consider regarding the NYP tape.....

In the literature I have received from the NYP they are requesting that the recording should be made as a LIVE audition. To me that means one take for all 6 listed excerpts. (Turn machine on, play the 6 excerpts, turn machine off) This is a lot different than tapes I have made in the past where I focus on maybe 2-3 excerpts in a recording session and patch together a tape of excerpts over the course of a whole week. Not editing any individual excerpt, but picking and choosing the best recorded take on a single excerpt over a few days.

Recording perfect takes on 6 separate excerpts all in one shot, Geeeez.
Also, the last excerpt is Schmulye......

Steve

trumpetchad · Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2004 4:53 am Post subject:

Sounds like a real audition, huh?

robert_white · Heavyweight Member Joined: 19 Feb 2003 Posts: 1583

Good point, Steve. Although, it does say that you can edit pauses between pieces, just not within an excerpt - which pretty much means you can record it over whatever length of time you wish.

Irving · Heavyweight Member Joined: 11 Feb 2003 Posts: 1888

If you feel like you are qualified to hold the aforementioned position in the NYP, and feel comfortable with the requirements of the audition, I'd say, "go for it", and forget about the tape. Spend your time practicing instead. If you aren't sure, then I would say don't even bother making the tape.