Did you ever notice that the Canadian Orchestras and a few other countries have "National Auditions" and they need a "no hire" before they can have an "international audition". How often do they "no hire" on purpose??? Why don't US orchestras do "National Auditions" also? Seems fair if US citizens can't take their national auditions.

being an american and working in a canadian orchestra, i can say that it happens fairly often that a no hire will occur, thus making int'l auditions necessary, although i don't think it is on purpose (at least in my orchestra). i feel like most people just want the best available player. also, it may be of interest that usually cdn. auditions bring less than 10 people, so a no hire then seems more understandable due to the lack of applicants...

I kinda like the idea of "national auditions" first. Especially since so many other countries make it "harder" for us to work there.

This is a very interesting topic- it is very much like international trade- everyone benefits when it is open and free, but if one side unilaterally imposes tariffs, it can seem unfair... I am a U.S. citizen, and despite the competition I'm fine with other nationalities coming here, but I am *highly* disappointed when we are not afforded the same opportunities overseas. Where does the parochialism end? By first having an audition for people born in the same city? The same region? The same continent? Having this barrier at the national level almost seems arbitrary when one considers all the other arbitrary bases on which a line can be drawn.

Overall, equality in opportunity seems fair for all musicians. That said, in countries where the orchestra is largely (or entirely) funded by taxes, I understand the desire to hire homegrown musicians to keep the government's money flowing to the locals, even if "local" is on a national level.

Yes, it makes sense when government funded orchestras want to keep the work within the country however it can severely limit the quality and variety of musicians who show up to auditions. The orchestra will also be hard-pressed to grow in order to maintain international standards depending on the size of the country. The reason American orchestras are so good is that they are generally most concerned with getting the best players possible. (This is not to say that I think American orchestras are bar none the best in the world.)

Of the people I know personally who have recently won national auditions, they've proven themselves internationally, or have been chosen over Canadians who have had that experience. If not enough talent shows up, they hold an international round. I don't necessarily agree that national auditions are the best way, but American orchestras don't have this initial limitation and there still are a lot of "no hire" situations.
Also, American orchestras hire Americans a lot of the time. The country has a lot of top-level music institutions and a large population of musicians to choose from. I don't think it's just because of their fair policies with regards to nationality.

in case of New Zealand, the orchestra was required by law to prove to their government that they had made every attempt to hire a native kiwi before hiring someone from abroad (me, for example).

Just how common is it to meet a foreigner not already living/studying in the US at an audition in the US? My feeling is that it's not at all common (well, Canadians....). People simply don't usually go from Europe to the US for an audition. And Chinese or Venezuelans give up when they check the visa procedures. Or are US auditions flooded by all the fantastic strings players from China and Venezuela now?

These restrictive practices may seem unfair at first glance, but we should keep in mind the substantial inequality that exists in the musical strength of the U.S. vis-à-vis the smaller countries. If a country like New Zealand didn't give the locals first crack, they might be overwhelmed with American musicians, with most of the natives left out in the cold.

The question of whether the U.S. should do the same thing and exclude foreign musicians reminds me of when a Women's Philharmonic was being formed many years ago, no men allowed. Some men were up in arms, saying, "If they can do that, why can't we exclude them and have a Men's Philharmonic?"

The reality is that the power dynamic doesn't flow both ways - until a quarter century ago men had most of the power in the music world, the orchestras were largely "men's philharmonics," and men were not in the position of needing a jumpstart. The same thing might be said about Affirmative Action programs. The group with 90% of the power shouldn't complain about the minority with less power getting some breaks until things level out. It may be theoretically unfair, but in a practical sense it's needed.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Feuermann,

Feuermann sure makes some good points.

Afropauken also pointed out how easy it is to obtain a work visa in Canada, once you win an audition.

Have you ever looked at the US immigration policy? It is a freakin' nightmare. That in itself is a self-limiting factor in USA auditions. They may not be called "national" by the orchestras themselves, but believe me, the immigration rules pretty much make it such.

Sometimes it is easy to feel hard-done by for not being allowed an opportunity, but what goes around comes around (or so I like to believe), and eventually, you will be afforded an opportunity that someone else was not.

I would like to point out to Euro bassoon, unlike in Europe, other problems aside, in most cases a qualified player from Europe WOULD be invited to audition in the states. There are a few countries in Europe I can think of where this is not the case, and you have to "know" somebody. In some cases I have known people that have had to take a pre-audition, just to see if they will let you take the real audition. It's often very hard just to get your foot through the door.