the BSO has a violin audition in november. does anyone know how many openings there are?

According to their audition page, there are 3 section violin openings.

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

Don't even bother taking this audition. Boston NEVER hires anyone. Last viola audition, no hire. Violin auditions in the past, they never hire anyone. why waste the money? i'm predicting that they will not take any violinists in this next "audition"

quote:

Originally posted by notamusicdork:
Don't even bother taking this audition. Boston NEVER hires anyone.

Great attitude...Obviously one less person to compete against at this audition...

I know for a fact that many in the orchestra have been displeased with the number of no-hires in the past. Enough so that I believe there have been a few changes in the wording of the CBA in order to lower the likelihood of this happening again (someone please correct me if this isn't true).

Trust me...no orchestra wants to be known as a group that never hires. It is a major expenditure of money to even have the audition in the first place. Does it happen? Yes. Is it frustrating? You betcha. St. Louis is on their 3rd piccolo audition, NY had a no hire for percussion/timp audition this summer...I'm sure we can all list a few more.

However, if you don't show up, you can't win. Simple fact.

you're right. i won't be at this audition. i play a brass instrument!

I thinks all orchestra SHOULD follow what the METROPOLITAN OPERA does,which is ALWAYS hiring someone from an open audition,personally whether you like it or not i think AFM should FORCE all orchestras to do this.
It's funny the METROPOLITAN OPERA orchestra is still #1 musically and $$$$ in anyone's book of standards.
Orchestra's needs to realize they are simply playing with people's lifes when they don't hire because of this or that.
The MET is still #1, AND they don't F$$k around at the auditions, ALWAYS HIRE baby!! None of this ,oh you're not good enough BS.

In some cases, orchestras don't do themselves any favors.

In the case of the NY Asst Timpani/Percussion audition, they took ZERO of the candidates who submitted recordings, and then only had 14 people audition live (I believe only 17 were invited). I find it insulting to anyone who spends the considerable time required to make an audition tape to refuse to take even the best 2 or 3 tapes (even if one's impression from the tape is that they wouldn't be likely to win); you never know how much musicianship and sound gets distorted or lost in the recording process.

Considering that the vacancy had been previously filled by someone who won the job right out of school, I don't see a reason why an orchestra would put themselves at such risk for having a no-hire by not inviting a more reasonable number of candidates.

Those were different times when Joe was hired, with A very different person on the committee. Makes a big difference I guess. Especially considering the level of the two players that where in the semis.

quote:

Originally posted by supanova:
I thinks all orchestra SHOULD follow what the METROPOLITAN OPERA does,which is ALWAYS hiring someone from an open audition,personally whether you like it or not i think AFM should FORCE all orchestras to do this.
It's funny the METROPOLITAN OPERA orchestra is still #1 musically and $$$$ in anyone's book of standards.
Orchestra's needs to realize they are simply playing with people's lifes when they don't hire because of this or that.
The MET is still #1, AND they don't F$$k around at the auditions, ALWAYS HIRE baby!! None of this ,oh you're not good enough BS.

Let me get this straight - you want the AFM to force orchestras to always hire someone?

The MET can do this because they're one of the highest-paying and prestigious orchestras in the US. They know they will draw somebody worth at least giving a trial to. That said, they are extremely selective about who they actually invite to live auditions, so I'm not sure I would call them "open." They do let unknown players submit a CD for consideration, but there have been at least a few instances where no CD applicants were invited.

All of that is the MET's right to do. But forcing other orchestras to do the same could have dire artistic consequences for some smaller ICSOM and virtually all ROPA orchestras. Quite plainly, there are just some auditions where NOBODY plays well. Should I be forced to hire someone for a year or two knowing that they can't play well enough to earn tenure? How would that be more "fair" than not hiring a winner?

I have been on a panel when nobody was hired, and I have to tell you, it's a last resort decision most of the time. You really want SOMEBODY to play well... but nobody does. Yet I should be forced to hire the "best of the bad"? I think that's a bad idea.

Orchestras are not "playing with people's [sic] lifes [sic]" when they don't hire. They're simply protecting the quality of their product.

quote:

Originally posted by supanova:
I thinks all orchestra SHOULD follow what the METROPOLITAN OPERA does,which is ALWAYS hiring someone from an open audition,personally whether you like it or not i think AFM should FORCE all orchestras to do this.
It's funny the METROPOLITAN OPERA orchestra is still #1 musically and $$$$ in anyone's book of standards.
Orchestra's needs to realize they are simply playing with people's lifes when they don't hire because of this or that.
The MET is still #1, AND they don't F$$k around at the auditions, ALWAYS HIRE baby!! None of this ,oh you're not good enough BS.

I know this topic gets hashed to death, but I feel the need to point out that the Met can do this because they are a top orchestra and they are in a city artistically minded people want to live in. They are guaranteed to get the cream of the crop at their auditions. Other big orchestras in similar cultural centers could also get away with doing this, I don't think it would be a bad idea. *But*, you're calling for a blanket AFM rule, which, besides the fact it would never happen, would be a very bad idea for smaller orchestras in more out of the way cities that aren't guaranteed to get satisfactory players at every audition.

quote:

Should I be forced to hire someone for a year or two knowing that they can't play well enough to earn tenure? .

Nobody should be forced to hire anybody. The problem is that someone is already sitting in that seat. Therefore, by not hiring anybody, in fact they are hiring someone.

The reality is that 2 out-of towners can be the only finalists for a job, and neither gets it. They go home unemployed, yet someone is going to be in that chair at the next rehearsal, and it aint gonna be them. As the song goes, "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice".

If nobody gets a job, the next audition could be up to a year away. That pretty much assures someone that they have a one-year position. I think it would be worth considering offering one of the two finalists that one year spot, or at least part of it. I think a lot of people would jump at the chance.

It's very hard to rationalize an audition where nobody is "good enough", yet there is someone sitting in that chair who isn't "good enough" either. If you made the final round and they did not, that's a pretty bitter pill to swallow.

With regard to the MET always hiring someone - I once heard a principal wind player there say that they really didn't have the option of not hiring someone, as the workload was too great to leave a hole in the roster. Don't know if it's the same story in the strings. Anyway, as it happens, most who are hired end up getting tenure anyway.

I only point this out, as it colors the rationale a bit when you want to hold the MET up as an example when making the argument that auditions should always yield a hire.

I'm sure it's obvious, but there's no way the union could ever force a hire. I agree that it's maddening to see no-hires happen so frequently, but it's not a union issue. Most auditions include a union steward in the room to ensure the CBA is followed and nothing outwardly fishy happens. That's about all you can hope for right? If such a process still yields no-hires repeatedly, it's up to the orchestra's own players to say "WTF"?

Keep in mind that orchestras run auditions hoping to hire someone.

The BSO is holding violin auditions again, with 4 vacancies. I seem to remember their holding similar audutions less than a year ago. Did they not take anybody? Or were they cancelled, perhaps due to James Levine being indisposed?

One thing I've noticed about the BSO compared to other major orchestras, is that they seem to have vacancies more often, and that those vacanies have more open spots in them. What does that say about the BSO? Is there a lot of dissatisfaction? A lot of fiddlers reaching retirement age (and what is the retirement age, btw?) at the same time? Coincidnece?

They have many no-hires, including the four violin openings from last year's audition (and the four violin auditions from the year before?). On their website, under "Auditions," they announce the winners from recent auditions. At times it would list four or five recent auditions with "No Hire" beside each.

On the other hand, in the past several years they have held successful auditions for principal and 2nd trombone, assistant trumpet (twice), 4th trumpet, harp, clarinet and flute. And recall that one cello audition that ended in 3 hires!

So even though he recent horn audition had no winner, it is certainly an overstatement to say that they rarely hire.

I'm not sure re the BSO - anybody have any inside info? But I have a friend in another East-coast orchestra that I won't name, that was notorious for not hiring people for posted vacancies year after year. The union required them to post vacancies. But no one can prove that anyone who auditioned for them was legitimately "good enough", or not. They did it to save money. Subs cost less than permanent players. That's a cruel joke to play on musicians who knock themselves out for weeks preparing for something they have no hope of winning, going to the expense of travel, hotels, etc.

Curious about this too. The Cleveland Orchestra just had a one-day audition with less than 60 people there and hired three violinists. Can Boston not find one?

Does anyone know re violin auditions, if/when they ask you to send a pre-live audition CD, are those requirements unique to that orchestra, or do i remember it being a standard list set in conjunction with the AMF? Or was that an AFM suggestion only, that an orchestra may agree to or not, as they wish.

I did read that BSO concertmaster, Malcolm Lowe, and some others did begin what obviously became a very successful audition process for them by agreeing to, and making and sending a (pre-CD) tape to begin with. But most asked to do this are at a disatvantage. Whereas those invited directly to the live auditions can begin preparing the live list immediately, those required to send a CD must prepare a few things not on the live list in addition to the live list. But it's only natural to put the most preparation emphasis on the CD till it's done. Then you have to catch up.

If the requirements are standard, you can make a CD at your leisure, and then have it for when you need it.

I believe every tape list is different. A good friend of mine, who is invited to other "Big 5/6/7" orch auditions b/c of their current job, has always been asked to send a tape to BSO. You're right, it puts them at a disadvantage. Especially annoying since the BSO seems to not fill these violin spots. Perhaps if they would invite more people to show up without a tape the pool would be better? Or perhaps it wouldn't matter either way...</conspiracy>