I would like to hear some thoughts on feedback from audition committee. In my orchestra, it's a common practice to have comments readily available to anyone who auditioned. When I've sat on the panel, I've always taken notes as thoroughly as I possibly could, keeping in mind that many people might find them useful, as subjective as they might be. I've recently taken some auditions and a couple of places refused to provide any sort of feedback. One would think it's the least thing (courtesy?) the orchestra could do to acknowlege/thank people for spending a fortune and a great deal of personal time to prepare and attend their audition. If anyone has anything to add or disagree, I would love to hear. Thanks

Our orchestra leaves it up to individual committee members on whether they wish to be contacted for comments, and I agree that providing feedback to those who want it is the least we can do. (At my first audition, for the Indianapolis Symphony, the whole committee came down to talk to all of the finalists after the audition, and let us ask questions, gave feedback, and the principal violist even took us each into a practice room to give feedback personally. I don't know whether they always do this, but I left that audition with a great feeling as a result, even though I lost.)

However, I've been on audition committees where I was the only one, or one of two, who said yes to being contacted. I know that some musicians simply aren't comfortable dispensing negative feedback directly, and say no, but I think another reason might be that, in early rounds, when decisions on who to advance are easier than they are in later rounds, a lot of musicians don't seem to take a lot of notes, which would make feedback impossible days or weeks after the fact.

Again, I'm not trying to offer excuses, and I do think that the responsible thing to do is to take notes and offer feedback, but I thought I'd throw out a couple of reasons why some committee members don't agree to be contacted.

Thanks for your insight, Sam! I agree that many people don't feel comfortable communicating negative comments in person... Seattle symphony had a pretty good solution: they had anonymous blank forms that the committee filled out and passed on to auditionees at the time of dismissal after the round. They had a similar thing going when I sat on the panel at Orlando Phil some years ago... I loved your Indi audition story!!!!

Another reason might be that they are prohibited from giving feedback by their CBA, as is the case with the Oregon Symphony (though some committee members might bend this rule occasionally). I personally don't agree with the rule, but that's the way it is for us (until there's a move to have it changed).

In case you're interested, we had a mildly interesting discussion about this a little while ago:

http://myauditions.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/1971029632/m/7521043013

RWhite, I can't believe I missed that one, what a great thread! Some great insights and opinions.

It bugs me when orchestras specify that they don't give ANY comments at all. I can understand not ALL of the committee members want to bother, & not everyone's going to ask, but at least give people the option, esp. if they played the whole list & didn't advance or got into semi-finals/finals. However, I have received some comments in which 2 committee members told me 2 totally different things (ie, one person liked this, but another person didn't), so I don't really know how to take those & don't find it that helpful. Also, personally, I never bother asking for comments if I don't advance when I know I didn't play that well

Dear Left,
When I sat on the panel for our Principal Flute audition (Charlotte SO) I, along with many others, only took general notes in the first round- things like poor rhythm, pitch, et cetera. It was just enough to remind myself why or why not I didn't think the person should advance. I would think that in the first round of an audition that's a pretty common approach since there are so many people. And I think it's almost safe to assume that if you didn't advance out of a first round you had fairly basic problems- again, most often pitch and rhythm.

In second and third rounds when a person's musicality and personality are of more interest I feel it is important to take more detailed notes. Then during breaks when we are making decisions we can refer back to specifics and if candidates want feedback it's there.

Interestingly enough, I was only contacted by one flutist for comments (I don't know if other panel members agreed to speak with the players).

I also understand orch's predicament of receiving conflicting comments. That's what happens when it comes down to ultra-specific differences between candidates that some people favor and some don't.