I have a question for people who have won auditions...Did you really play completely perfectly- (in tune, always beautiful sound, musical, etc) or did you have a few things that didn't go well. I have taken 2 auditions and didn't play my best at either, but I can't imagine being under that pressure and being able to play flawlessly(for me at least). I hope someone will tell me they did make a few mistakes!

Interesting question. I think we all feel like there is this elusive perfect audition out there. I don't know if anyone ever really plays perfectly. With auditions being so subjective, I suppose all you can do is play really well and hope the intangibles match up with that particular committee's desires.
I have won one ICSOM orchestra audition and been a finalist many times and don't know that I necessarily played that much better when I won. There have definitely been times when I was clearly not having a great day, but I know that I have never played "perfectly" and don't think I ever will.

I've never played an audition perfectly, and I've never heard anyone else do so either, win or lose. I don't think perfection is really the issue - if I'm on an audition committee and I hear someone with dazzling sound, great rhythm, and a strong sense of the music, I'm not going to chuck them out the window because of one or two small flubs. I think most people listening to auditions are listening more for an overall baseline of ability than for specific mistakes.

But the flip side of this is that a lot of people who take auditions seem either to be unaware of just how many mistakes they're making, or don't have an accurate idea of what kind of mistakes are acceptable (an obviously random flub of a shift, a momentary loss of tone,) and what kind of mistake sends up an immediate red flag (persistent rushing or dragging, lack of crisp spiccato, skipped dynamics.) The biggest of these for me is rhythm, because I'm a violist. Our job is to follow everyone else, and be as deadly accurate as we can. It ain't glamorous, but it's a living, and no matter how beautiful someone's solo Bach is, I don't want them next to me if they can't hold the tempo in Beethoven 9.

First, I think the word perfect should be eliminated from a classical musicians vocabulary. Young musicians taking auditions need to understand that it's not about "nailing it" and playing all of your notes in tune and in time etc. One must be accurate in their execution, ofcourse, but that's just the foundation upon which we make our music. A smart committee is looking for a great musician who will fit into their orchestra's style of play.

I find it funny when someone finds out they didn't advance and they are in shock because they played "perfectly" and how can that be?! It's important to understand that you can go in and play exactly how you wanted to play but that doesn't mean you're going to advance every time or win every audition. The way you played may not be what the committee was looking for. It's not a game of darts.

I have won an audition where I really felt like I played my best. That is a great feeling. But I have also won an audition where in three rounds, I felt I played just ok. I also went through a period of time when I wasn't advancing at auditions even though I felt I was playing completely solid and accurately. What I realized was that I had become too concerned with playing "perfectly" -- hitting the notes, playing what was on the page and with good time. A committee member at a Cleveland Orchestra audition pointed out to me that even though everything sounded good and was executed well, it lacked personality and spark. So I was reminded that I had to do much more than just play the page, I had to really focus on being a musician and performing the excerpts. I've known several people to win big jobs after bombing a first or second round at the audition. But they were great musicians and that came through!

So in my humble opinion, I believe you will find that all you can do is prepare the best you can and put your best playing forward at each audition. The rest will take care of itself. You may not always play "your best" but make sure you have solid ideas and that you are musical.

Also, I would point out that it's never a good idea to tell people how you think you played while waiting for results of a round. Just a thought.

I think that's just about as well as it can be put, Ludde. And you reminded me that at my audition here in Minnesota, I was actually stunned to be advanced past the semi-final round, because I felt like I had played well below my ability, and much worse than I had played in my first round. Later, talking to members of my committee after I won the job, I found out that a) even from behind a screen, they recognized my concerto because I had taken a unique approach to it that they liked, and b) they had heard the same flubs I did in the second round, but thought I was worth keeping around anyway, on the theory that I was a good player having a subpar round.

Knowing these things changed the way I thought about auditions, and I've always tried to show the same mercy to auditioning candidates that I know was shown to me that day. It's paid off more than once for our viola section.

quote:

Also, I would point out that it's never a good idea to tell people how you think you played while waiting for results of a round. Just a thought.

So true, yet the question seems unavoidable! My generic response now is, "eh... you know...".

Nice idea for a post

My experience echoes those who have sometimes advanced, and even won, after auditions which I felt were not well-played, and the reverse of that is also true.

I came to actually doubt my own perceptions after doing well at auditions in which I thought I had played poorly. My perception was that I had flubbed up enough to be sent packing. Others perceptions were that I was good enough.

It was a great lesson for me that self-agonizing and detailed post-mortems (not the educational kind, but the beating-ones-self-up kind) are destructive and in many cases, not even necessary...as what I thought didn't seem to matter in the end.

An interesting post indeed.

The best advice I was ever given about auditions was to see them as a performance, such as a recital. With this in mind is there such a thing as a perfect performance? Of course not.

I think in the strive for perfect performance many players forget their responsibility of delivering a musical performance as well. I truly believe once you get to the point of having all of your technical details being at a very high level consistently at auditions, what makes the difference between you and everybody else is your musicality or lack there of. Auditions are tiring not only for the player but for audition committees as well. Audition committees are not only looking for easy ways to cut people, but they are also looking for easy ways to distinguish people as well. So maybe one should strive for a musically perfect performance, which of course not really possible to do, but at least it might be more interesting to listen to.