The purpose of this article is to call the attention of my colleagues to the chaotic state of the present auditioning scene. When I volunteered to write on this subject for the I.D.R.S. journal, Ron Klimko welcomed my offer and warned that I would be opening a "can of worms". He was right, and all of us know it. The can has to be opened; we have to speak out. Those of us who can afford the risk of offending, even unintentionally, must either take that risk or remain silent and thus allow the present corruption and injustice to flourish. Our music schools and conservatories train in increasing numbers many hopeful young musicians whose capabilities are most impressive. Yet, their increasing numbers are finding that opportunities after graduation are diminishing. The very musicians who are now in the position to give these hopefuls a hearing are the same ones who are in effect conspiring to deny them the chance to be heard. The teachers of this country who are training them so well stand by silently and let them fend for themselves after graduation. For some teachers the students who graduate from their schools will have served their purpose, to fill a teacher's load or to fill out the required school ensembles. Unless we try to reverse these trends, all of us will be losers. Schools will have fewer students, teachers will find it harder to justify their existence, but worst of all, much talent will be unfulfilled. None of us can know who will win an audition, but we must try to get a fair hearing for everyone who applies.

This article draws on approximately fifty years of participation in and observation of the audition process for bassoonists. At the outset of my career as a bassoonist I had the good fortune of studying with outstanding teachers, Vincent Pezzi at the Eastman School of Music and Simon Kovar of New York. Subsequently I spent many years as solo bassoonist of the St. Louis Symphony, as a teacher in summer programs, including the Aspen Institute and the Music Academy of the West, and for the past thirty six years as a freelance bassoonist in Los Angeles. For the past thirty-three years I have taught bassoon at the Music School of the University of Southern California. This breadth of experience affords me an unusually privileged vantage point from which to discuss auditions of the past as well as the present, especially since I have had personal contact with many of the outstanding young players of today who have or are now competing for jobs in the symphonic field. Of course my contacts are for the most part with my own students, past and present, but I have also had the privilege of contact with students of other teachers. I can assure everyone that the standard of bassoon playing in this country is the highest it has ever been.

I will attempt by anecdotal means to illustrate my thesis on the basis of my personal experiences as a participant and more extensively from the experiences of my students and my colleagues. If my readers have much to add, deny, or protest, let us all work on the "can of worms". My purpose in calling attention to these situations is to initiate talk among my colleagues with the hope that we may make audition conditions better in the coming years. My comments may evoke recollections among those who have found themselves in similar situations. The collegiality expressed in the I. D. R. S. journal makes it an ideal forum in which to explore and discuss audition problems. Those who remain silent when they have something to offer are part of those problems.

During my last years as a first bassoonist orchestra committees were being formed because musicians wanted a voice in decisions directly affecting them. I remember our orchestra's first attempts when we wanted a committee to represent our interests. Management told us it was all right with them as long as we did not interfere in the affairs of the orchestra! Nevertheless, committees were instituted to curb the injustices, abuses and excesses of management and conductors. Committees are now accepted as an integral part of orchestras and they certainly do participate in all orchestral affairs. Since their inceptions they have developed explicit procedures for auditions, hiring, tenure and dismissals. Orchestras have proven capable of winning and defending their rights in certain procedures. In addition, ICSOM was created.

Auditioning committees have many rights that did not exist years ago and with those rights and procedures come many responsibilities. Unfortunately, the present audition situation has become one of anarchy mixed with chicanery, touches of arrogance and stupidity. Unless changes are instituted, aspiring instrumentalists will find themselves unable to compete on a level playing field and those of us who teach them will have to develop their skills in areas other than playing. We will have to deal with subjects such as political maneuvering, influence manipulation, behind-the-scenes strategies, telepathy and other "creative" enterprises that have nothing to do with qualities of performance and musicianship.

So far ICSOM, an organization created by and for symphony musicians to protect their interests, does so in a militant manner but apparently it does not have the authority or will to correct and police auditioning procedures. Symphony boards are often made up of business people who are not sympathetic to the needs and worth of musicians. Many conductors have their own agendas which often are not in the best interests of musicians. Somehow we accept that and even expect it. What is so incongruous to me is that some of our own fellow musicians find ways through disregard, neglect and self-serving agendas to "do their own colleagues in". Once they have their positions, which are protected by hard-won battles, they forget that there are still aspiring musicians who would like to present themselves when vacancies occur in the orchestra. I have been told that orchestra committees don't have the time or inclination to listen to all who want to audition. This irresponsibility calls for action by ICSOM and/or any other agencies to correct such blatant disregard by our fellow musicians, who have the power to make changes in audition procedures.

The usual rationalization is that there are too many players and we should therefore make certain that students are aware of their chances. I am sure that many of us do have such discussions with our students. However, students can count and many of them want to be professional musicians in spite of the odds against them. I submit that those who wish to try do deserve the best we have to offer and that most certainly includes a fair chance at a hearing.

Another rationalization for limiting participation in auditions is that applicants are not accepted "in order to save them the expenses". To that I say, let each aspirant make that decision. If the audition is truly an open one, the expense can be justified by the opportunity to be heard and judged fairly.

One category of player has no difficulty getting an audition. I speak of those who already have positions. Orchestras do want "experienced" players. Since experienced players have already "paid their dues", I have no objection to that practice. Because they have free passes let no one think they should be the only ones competent enough to compete. There is no telling the circumstances that led to their getting orchestral positions - it may have been by way of the corruption I will speak of later. There is no way of knowing the quality of competition they will have now have to face. They should be able to prove themselves against all competitors.

Years ago, I told a former student in a prominent orchestra that if all the first bassoonists in the country were to vacate their positions and had to compete under present conditions with the current group of highly skilled young players who are now auditioning, ninety-eight percent of the incumbents would be replaced. He took offense at my remark and told me that he was an artist who was well qualified for the job he has. He missed my point; I was not implying that he was inadequate but wished only to note the high caliber of the competition. Subsequently he made my point for me. He has tried for vacancies in other orchestras and has yet to win an audition. One can well imagine what might happen if the current group of highly skilled players were competing for his open position.

The choices that committees and conductors must now make can be easy, since a more than sufficient number of auditioners perform at a level of excellence that precludes a mistake in selection. If the audition is open and allows unlimited participation any one of the finalists in an audition can do a wonderful job. It is nonsense to think that one particular bassoonist is the best, to limit numbers in auditions, or to consider a resume as one of the criteria for invitations to auditions.

My initial knowledge of auditions came at a time when there were no general rules for conducting them. There were no orchestra committees that I was aware of, and for the most part conductors would make changes on their own at any time, since tenure was not a formal policy in most orchestras. Often it was a practice to make a change without letting the incumbent know that he was being replaced, nor the reason why. Before starting his first season, a new conductor would come to an orchestra and bring in players with whom he was familiar. These players were not necessarily better than the incumbents. There were cases where those choices were inferior, and when the conductor left for another orchestra the inferior players remained in their positions.

My first chance at an audition occurred when I was a freshman at the Eastman School of Music. My teacher asked me to play for a visiting conductor of the Rochester Philharmonic who was supposedly looking for a bassoonist. I did not wish to play for him since I was just an incoming student and knew I had a lot to learn, but upon Mr. Pezzi's insistence I went to the conductor's hotel room, where he put the first bassoon part of Till Eulenspiegel in front of me. He chose a passage played with the trombones that is double forte with accidentals in front of most of the notes. It goes quite rapidly and at that period of my education I had never heard of the piece, let alone played that passage. I tried to read it and it was a disaster. I had to stop many times. Each time I was urged by the conductor not to stop despite a plethora of wrong notes. I was delighted when he finally gave up and allowed me to leave.

My second audition took place after my graduation from Eastman, before going to study in New York, and it was for a first bassoon position in a fine midwestern orchestra. Since the conductor had agreed to the audition, I was unaware that the job had already been filled. At the audition the conductor stood at the rear of the small hall where I played and carried on a continuous conversation with a friend. At that time, as it is in many cases today, common courtesy and consideration were lacking. Later in the audition this same conductor was admonished by another auditioner on the stage who asked him if he came to hear his playing or to talk through it. You can guess the outcome of that audition.

My years in New York gave me the chance to hear and associate with many wonderful students and players of my generation. Of course most of the bassoonists of that day were studying with Simon Kovar, and I learned a lot about orchestras and auditions since Mr. Kovar's method heavily emphasized orchestral literature. Mr. Kovar was constantly called by conductors for advice on the selection of bassoon players. (He was also called if some of his students misbehaved). On some occasions conductors would call him for a first bassoonist. Mr. Kovar would not recommend just one candidate. Instead, he would send at least three to an audition. I asked why and Mr. Kovar told me that when the conductor called back after hearing them and stated his preference, Mr. Kovar would always reply, "I knew you would pick the best one". It was a wonderful lesson for me and throughout my career I have tried to do the same. Not only is there wisdom and fairness in that method but there is really no telling what some conductors want. It is my opinion that occasionally they themselves don't even know. Their choices are sometimes governed by factors other than the ability of the performer.

My third audition occurred after I went to study in New York, and it was for the same conductor who heard me in my freshman year at Eastman! This time there was a vacancy and I was urged by Mr. Kovar to try for it. There were only three contestants for the position. I played in the hotel room of the conductor, and he had a stack of first bassoon parts on the table. I was able to play all the solos he asked for, by memory, and I was even prepared to play the infamous passage from Till Eulenspiegel from memory, but he did not ask for it. However, he did catch me on a passage on the last page of a tutti part in Roman Carnival. In those days there were a lot of passages I did not practice because I felt no one ever heard them and besides, they were "impossible". Now I know better. In that audition I was successful.

After many years in the orchestra as first bassoonist I found that the uncertainties and the instability of the orchestra, as well as a very short season, made a change imperative. When I decided to leave my position it was taken by the first applicant who put his bassoon together correctly in the conductor's living room - practically no audition! That conductor did not like to waste time on auditions and a story is told about his filling of a trumpet vacancy. He was called long distance by a trumpet player who was applying for the position. I'm told that he asked the trumpet player to play on the phone. He did and he got the job!

just after my decision to leave, a very fine bassoonist in a wonderful orchestra retired and I ditioned. along with many players of that per Of course in all auditions, if the players are assembled in the same warm-up room, everyone sounds better than you do. The first round was the usual playing of the Mozart Concerto. I did not get beyond that round, but I must say that I was in a group of rejected players who were and are some of the finest of my generation. The winner of that audition was an excellent choice and he has had a wonderful career that he and the orchestra well deserve.

There are many examples of injustice and chicanery. Let me provide some in order to start an open discussion with those who can add to the list as well as to invite those whose views differ from my own. With a forum such as the I.D.R.S. and with an organization such as ICSOM perhaps we can provide some order out of the chaos that now exists.

The back-door audition is a relative of the practice that conductors engaged in years ago. They are now getting the collaboration of some of our colleagues. An orchestra I was in had a world-famous conductor who engaged in that dubious practice. For all I know, he still does. When I was in his orchestra, a former student of mine had the gall to contact our conductor to audition surreptitiously for the second bassoon position, even though there was no vacancy. The conductor had never even criticized my colleague. I took strong exception to the unjustified initiative of my student and confronted him. He told me he did it secretly because he knew that had he asked for my permission I would have refused it. It is ironic that in the intervening years he finally became a member of that orchestra and is a strong advocate of the tenure principle!

A famous conductor asked me to play for him in his hotel room because he was not satisfied with the contestants for a vacancy. There was an auditioning committee and he told me that I could try for the position in the privacy of his room and subsequently play for the committee if he wanted me. I turned down the offer by saying that if I were interested in the job I would want to
go through the accepted audition procedure. His next remark was to the effect that he would consult one of our well-known colleagues for help, thus circumventing the procedure again.

As I stated previously, even conductors don't know what they want in a bassoonist. It would be most enlightening and would help all of us, students, performers and teachers alike, to have them spell out the qualities they look for in a bassoonist. The I.D.R.S. Journal would be a good place for conductors to state their criteria.

Furthermore, audition committees seldom say how they wish a passage to be played and seldom offer an auditioner a second chance to play that passage. I have facetiously suggested that students learn telepathy. Isn't the essence of being a fine player the ability to adapt to various concepts quickly? I am certain many players can do this, but I find that conductors and audition committees do not state explicitly what they want. I think they purposely keep their criteria and standards unknown because they seem to want to eliminate as many as possible as quickly as possible. Consequently, players are rejected because they have "zigged" instead of "zagged".

I spoke to a bassoonist member of a committee after an audition; he had rejected a contestant partly because he played the Berceuse from the Firebird too loudly. I asked him if the player was asked to do it again more piano and he answered "no". I consider that nonsense combined with arrogance! I questioned him further on the fairness of that guessing game and he answered that it had been done to him many times! With regard to playing the Berceuse loudly, it has been my experience that conductors want it that way. They don't seem to be able to hold the accompaniment to a dynamic that will allow it to be played piano.

The music to Stravinsky's Firebird is required in many auditions. I would like to take this opportunity to correct a frequent mistake in the performance of the Berceuse. There are many of us who have performed it with Stravinsky conducting and I am stating unequivocally that there is no D natural in the last rendition of the solo. The correct notes are:

I had the opportunity to play the Firebird with Stravinsky in St. Louis and he insisted on D flat. On another occasion, in the forties, Stravinsky conducted an orchestra at the Columbia Broadcasting System. The bassoon section consisted of Harold Goltzer, Mr. Kovar, Sol Schoenbach, and myself. Before rehearsing the Berceuse, Sol told Harold that the Philadelphia Orchestra had just recorded it with Stokowski and that he had played D natural. Harold decided to ask Stravinsky who said he wanted D flat; Sol said in a stage whisper, "I guess we'll have to do the recording again".

The passage as written in the Stadio and Reghini studies is incorrect. I call this to the attention of many fine bassoonists such as Breidenthal, Paulson, and Birnstingl and conductors such as Abbado and Solti. Leinsdorf, in a recording session, told Breidenthal to play it either way. Would Leinsdorf treat Beethoven in that manner? I have heard bassoonists play it on records and broadcasts beautifully but unfortunately with the erroneous D natural. A short time ago I heard it played by the Philadelphia Orchestra and again it was D natural! Famous players and conductors can entrench a mistake and tradition continues it. I wonder how many would think it appropriate to go into an art museum and, with brush in hand, paint parts of a painting with colors they like better. Yet some don't hesitate to change notes in a musical composition even though the composer has definitely made his wishes known to performers. Researchers spend years trying to learn what composers intended, and books are published with their findings. Here we have a case of hearing from Stravinsky himself that he wanted D flat, not D natural, in the triplet in question, and we have bassoonists as well as conductors performing musical graffiti by changing his written and spoken wishes.

In a recent audition two bassoons who played the Bolero well received written criticisms to the effect that their renditions were not played in a "sensuous" manner. just what was wanted? What was meant? Another audition required playing the quarter note passage in the Scherzo of the Beethoven Fifth - it is played in unison with the pizzicati in the 'celli - "espressivo". I expect to see a bassoonist criticized for not playing the fast passage in the last movement of the Beethoven Fourth "dolce", as it is written. We now have auditions requiring the playing of a scale to high F. When that becomes commonplace, we'll have to go to high G! It seems that some demands made on aspirants have purposely become ill-defined, frivolous and nebulous in order to eliminate those who would otherwise have to be considered.

At this point I would like to state my objection to any sightreading requirement. I am aware that some rounds in auditions require sightreading by the contestants. One audition required the sightreading of a piece written for that audition by the retiring bassoonist! I might accept true sightreading if the practice had relevance to actual performance. In other words, when an orchestra, including the conductor, plays a concert consisting of one or more works where no one has seen the music, and when, at the performance, the music, including the score, is for the first time uncovered when the baton is ready for the down beat, then I will accept the necessity for sight reading skills. I would go to a concert like that just to see the antics of the conductors. They are the most favored in their situation - their backs are to the audience and the baton does not make a sound!

The involvement of musicians as well as conductors in the audition process became a means of eliminating "back door" auditions. This partnership also provides an opportunity for a comprehensive appraisal of the auditioners. Conductors as well as orchestra members should have a critical interest in the quality of performers they choose, yet I have been told that neither conductors nor committees want to spend the time necessary to hear those who wish to apply for a vacancy. This lack of concern opens the process to the corruption that committee involvement was supposed to eliminate.

Committees are acceding to the insistence of conductors that numbers of auditioners must be limited. A famous conductor stipulated that he would listen to only five competitors for an important bassoon position and he allotted only a few hours in which to make the decision. This abbreviated procedure seems to be welcome to many of our colleagues who don't want to be bothered. They forget those occasions when they themselves needed and welcomed all available opportunities to audition. I submit that this amnesia of convenience contributes to the lack of involvement that has developed.

About three summers ago I was contacted by a first bassoonist who wished me to recommend someone to audition for a temporary replacement in his section because of the retirement of an incumbent. He told me I would be restricted to one name since he was canvassing four others for recommendations. He claimed the appointment was just a temporary one pending full national auditions and that the conductor wished to hear only five players at this time. When he called, many of my students were already involved in their summer activities, but I did suggest someone who was available and well qualified to fill the position. My choice was not the person chosen but I could accept that, knowing this was an emergency and that the appointment was temporary. I knew that the national auditions would provide an opportunity for proper preparation and timely notice to everyone. In the fall I heard that the national auditions had been cancelled. I called the first bassoonist and our discussion developed into an argument. I protested the cancellation vigorously and he repeatedly told me that this was an exceptional case that would never be repeated and that their choice was the best one possible. He also claimed that the five applicants represented a "national audition". He added that this would never be repeated and that it would not set a precedent. I insisted that he was wrong about not setting a precedent. I learned later that he posted a letter to the orchestra stating his position on the circumvention of the customary procedure. He is supposed to have claimed that his choice was so well qualified that further auditioning was unnecessary. I have also learned that the bassoonist who was hired was one of his students. Since then the conductor of the orchestra has taken advantage of the abbreviated unjust procedure and has already made two replacements without any open auditions at all. When I heard about it I called the first bassoonist who admitted he felt rather "sheepish" about what had developed. If a conductor is too lazy or detached the musicians should carry out fair open procedures and then present the conductor with the limited number he is willing to hear.

A common practice is employed when there is an unexpected vacancy in an orchestra. An emergency replacement is hired until formal auditions can be held. I know of a case where the substitute still remains on the job without an audition. The audition had been announced and later it was cancelled. In that instance the audition was stifled within the orchestra and the substitute has become a permanent member. I have been told that the conductor is now saying it will never happen again. In another instance the second moved over to first until an audition for the first bassoon chair could be scheduled. When the audition was held it was for second bassoon. Of course the substitutes are happy, but why not validate the choice by having an open audition for the job.

Can a parent or teacher, as a member of an audition committee, be an unbiased and objective judge? The least he or she can do is abstain from voting. What about agreements before the audition among players in the orchestra regarding whom they will choose? I understand there have been agreements between teachers about who among their pupils will get a job.

We now see the word "qualifications" in every ad for auditions. One page resumes are requested. A few years after I auditioned for a position, I received an inquiry from that orchestra as to whether I would be interested in trying for a vacancy about to be filled. With the letter was a questionnaire in which I was to state my "qualifications". I was tempted to send back my questionnaire asking for the qualifications of the committee.

The person who is an expert at writing resumes can get preference over one who plays better. I was called once by a person on an auditioning committee who told me he was checking on eleven students of mine who were trying for the job. I asked for their names and seven of them had not ever studied with me. I think resumes are no indication of playing ability. I have been badly fooled by some of the resumes I received in applications for admittance to the USC School of Music.

In somewhat the same category is the request for tapes as a way of screening for the first round. Tapes do not necessarily provide a definitive means for judging a player. I don't mind the committees' requesting them, but I do not feel they should eliminate a contestant who has been refused on that basis and wants nevertheless to audition. I am told that the winner of a recent audition was not invited on the basis of his tape, but he protested and was given a hearing.

Probably the most difficult part of auditioning is the logistical task of screening applicants and giving them a fair hearing. When an opening is announced I think all who want to attend an audition should be given enough information so that they are able to assess the chances of winning. For instance, three categories could be established by the orchestra.

Category One. If there is someone whom the orchestra or conductor really wants, it should be announced and made clear that there is a minimal chance of changing their minds.

Category Two. If they have a few people who are being seriously considered, that should be made known.

Category three. This would be wide open, with no favored people.

With one of those categories made public at the time the audition is announced, all who apply would be allowed to audition. Anyone with common sense, having a realistic appraisal of his or her ability, should be able to decide intelligently whether to try for the job. These conditions still may produce large numbers of contestants. If they wish to spend the time and money, and there is no time for one committee to hear them all, then sub-committees could be appointed. These preliminary auditions could be held far enough in advance so that the numbers for the main orchestra audition committee were manageable.

There is a technique to being able to play your best in an actual audition. As with any other technique it has to be practiced. No one can synthesize in a studio the actual chemistry that obtains when someone faces an auditioning committee in an attempt to get a job. Participation in auditions is the only way to sharpen those skills. I submit that my colleagues and conductors have an obligation to the profession to see that full access is provided for all auditions. In addition, and most emphatically, my colleagues teach, as well they should since they have the knowledge and experience to impart. It seems to me the ultimate hypocrisy and "chutzpah" for a teacher to rig an audition to favor his or her own students, continue to teach others, and then send those students out to audition and demand a level playing field elsewhere. I am reminded of the story of the son who murdered his parents and then threw himself on the mercy of the court because he was an orphan!

I have already stated my objection to sightreading and I would like to suggest something in its place. Since all bassoonists are familiar with the Concert Etudes of Milde, I would suggest one or more be chosen as required pieces. They are compositions for solo bassoon, need no accompaniment, and are a good test of the musical ability of the performer. Perhaps a fast one and a slow one should be required. I prefer them to sightreading something that nobody has seen, where at best the player is grabbing for notes and rhythm without being able to demonstrate a capacity for musicality. Committee members should study the etudes required so that at the audition they can judge the quality of the performance. That requirement is what I meant in proposing that the jurors be "qualified".

The question of the repertoire to be prepared always seems to include the Concerto of Mozart. How it is to be played and what impresses the jury is a constant guess. I have heard contestants decide to play it in a "generic" manner (whatever that is) but again, one does not know whether to "zig" or "zag". A colleague told me of an audition that was held by Sir Thomas Beecham. There was a first bassoon vacancy in the orchestra that Beecham was forming, and he held the audition in his hotel room. The young aspirant for the job appeared and Beecham asked him if he knew the Mozart Concerto - what else? The bassoonist said "I'll take a stab at it" and then proceeded to play it. Upon finishing, Sir Thomas said, "Young man, you've not only taken a stab at it, you've mortally wounded it"! How many members of an auditioning committee really know what to listen for and what they want? Conductors, committees, here is your chance to describe your definitive interpretation of the Mozart Concerto. All of us, as well as the I.D.R.S., should be glad to have it.

There was a recent audition where a large majority of the auditioning committee, as well as the entire bassoon section, voted for someone whom the conductor did not wish to have. I believe the conductor's choice should always prevail since he is responsible for the quality of the orchestra. However, when there is such a difference of opinion between the committee and the conductor I think tenure should be withheld from the conductor's choice. In that way, should the conductor move on, the orchestra is not compelled to keep a player who was not its choice. Of course, should the player in question prove to be satisfactory, tenure could be granted by the orchestra.

Another provision should be considered. In these days of conductors spending so little time with their orchestras, their choices of players should be considered only if they spend more than half of the season with the orchestra. Why should the orchestra be saddled with a conductor's choice when he is not there most of the time?

We must realize it is possible that an audition may not produce a player satisfactory to the conductor. When that happens, either another audition can be arranged, or, having fulfilled its requirements, an orchestra and/or conductor can choose someone upon whom they agree. However, before this expedient is implemented, all those who wish to try for a job should be given a fair chance.

Some orchestras are now having finalists play in one of their ensembles, with the wind section of the orchestra or with the full orchestra. In the final analysis I think that is the best way to choose.

The many audition incidents I have cited lead me to some personal conclusions and some advice to committees, conductors and applicants. My readers in any of the aforementioned categories who are already offended will consider my advice gratuitous, but this article is meant to stimulate thought, discussion and constructive change. Whether you agree or not, I hope you will join with me and try to help.

To our colleagues who have the sometimes thankless job of making very difficult decisions, I would urge you to remember the times when you were aspiring to a job in an orchestra. Applicants are anxious, nervous, hoping to please, but not knowing how. They do "zig" when they should "zag" but it would surprise you how quickly many of them could comply with your wishes. Don't make decisions on appearances - music is an aural experience not a visual one; that piece of advice goes for some conductors "double". When the list from the repertoire is made up be sure that you ask for excerpts that you are capable of playing. I could compose a list of excerpts that would eliminate the best of you. If you are worthy of being on a committee, try to be completely impartial and do not be influenced by colleagues whose pupils are competing. Don't be like "Beckmesser" in "Meistersinger". Listen with an open ear and mind. Above all remember that every applicant deserves a fair chance.

To conductors I make the following comments. I have had many years of playing in your orchestras. During my career in music I have had contact with hundreds of musicians and you would be amazed at the similarity of their comments. My experience leads me to believe that the players in orchestras know and play their individual parts better than most conductors know their scores and how to conduct. Experienced orchestral musicians know when to ignore the conductor, especially when he has a choreography to perform rather than sticking to his job. People should be going to concerts to hear them not to see them. If they go for the latter reason nothing will pack them in quicker than a bare-breasted chorus line from Las Vegas. Think of all the budget deficits that could help erase! Since you have the power to overrule the choice of committees, I would suggest you use it wisely so that you can assemble an outstanding ensemble. Do not limit auditions because you do not wish to spend time on them. The quality of musician you help to select can enhance your performance as well as enrich those who hear it.

To applicants for auditions I make the following comments. The main reason I have written this article is to broaden the opportunities to be heard. Don't dilute my arguments by going to an audition badly prepared. Be realistic about your state of advancement, because you will be competing with a remarkable group of musicians. Everyone gets nervous and if it becomes an impediment to your performing well there are many modalities of help. I cannot suggest whom to consult, but I do know there are medicines, psychologists, hypnotists and others. It would surprise you to know how many fine performers get help of one kind or another.

I would also like to address those who do not succeed in an audition. Obviously, when there is only one position to fill there are many "losers" . Losing must be taken with grace because there are many salvageable aspects of the "loss". Those who are not chosen have gained valuable experience from its only source, the audition itself. Most winners in auditions are those who have lost many previous ones. Their experiences finally paid off. In addition, being heard by committees as well as other participants is not forgotten. I know of one case where a student lost one audition but was recommended by one of the committee to try for another opening, which he won.

The lowest level of losing is exemplified by a regular member of an orchestra who lost the audition for a temporary first chair, remained in the section as second bassoonist, and then proceeded to punish the winner. This happened a little over a year ago, and it is inexcusable that the orchestra in question did nothing to censure the offender who used terrorist tactics to make the winner of the audition uncomfortable. In this one blatant case I do know of - and I hope there are no more _ the loser would not speak to the temporary replacement and sighed each time he played a solo. She also refused to speak to those on the committee who voted for him. A year later, while she was on leave, this insolent pseudo -professional became hysterical because the former winner was hired for one week in an emergency during her absence. The first bassoonist succumbed to her ravings and went so far as to pay his own salary to the replacement for not coming. It is appalling that an orchestra can be held hostage to the threat of a tantrum by a dissatisfied loser.

I began this article by stressing that it would cover a fifty year span of my experiences with auditions. What impresses me most when I hear the bassoonists of today is that so many come from various teachers and from many schools all over the country. When I was a student, one school seemed predominant and although it did produce fine players, their expertise was often matched by their arrogance. These clones were students in a wind department where they were given the word of "god" and it was heresy for any of us to question it or to think of playing music in any way other than in accord with the prevailing gospel. During that period players other than the anointed ones were considered inferior and I was told personally by one of them that I would never be a good woodwind player unless I converted! None of these spreaders of that "true gospel" were able to explain it and by now it has been buried by the acceptance of players on their own merits who do not carry the imprimatur of any special region, school or teacher. The crossbreeding of musical ideas has produced a generation of marvelous performers in contrast to the attempted inbreeding espoused by that school.

In conclusion, my hope is that we open opportunities to listen to all who wish to audition and disregard pedigrees. Inherent in that is the absolute requirement that we give each one a fair hearing without prejudgments, without restricting their numbers and without rigging of any kind.

What is at stake is not only the profession of performing but also the profession of teaching. Those two branches have learning at their roots and without learning our profession will stagnate. If we fail to provide nourishment, the hope of participation in music as a livelihood will die. We will be performing musical "euthanasia" in allowing only those who meet our "criteria" to live as musicians.

Injustice unchallenged can become the law. The hard work and the dedication necessary for the development of fine musicians deserves more consideration. It should not be subject to facing the uncertainties and whims in those situations where some of our colleagues have their own axes to grind. Together let us try to develop fair standards for audition procedures so that 'Our profession can survive in its purest form, where we do not permit a few to besmirch it with corruption in order to gain their ends.

Note: The Editors of the I. D. R. S. would like to encourage your response to Mr.
Herzberg's thought-provoking article. Let us know of your feelings, reactions
and personal expertiences concerning the problems of auditioning procedures.
Can we achieve a standardization or not? Ed.

Table of Contents