Posted by Wade on January 15, 2004 at 21:38:26:
In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: President's Own Euphonium Audition posted by Rick Denney on January 15, 2004 at 20:05:33:
EXACTLY!
And I am getting tired of people bashing others due to either sour grapes or ignorance.
BTW - One reason for the secrecy is to prevent buddies giving jobs to buddies and to encourage the practice of advancing players based solely on musical performance.
I do not know whether or not you know the history of why many orchestras have carpets or rubber mats on the floor running from the entrance to the "hot seat". In fact, most here would not even have noticed this practice. But it is to allow women a fair chance with a sexist committee (not so much of a problem as it was in the '70's) while protecting the orchestra from lawsuits from disgruntled women charging the committee with sexist hiring practices.
Spaces chosen for auditions generally have hard floors. The sound of many female dress shoes are very easy to pick out from a crowd of mostly male dress shoes.
Used to be that the "klip klip" sound of pumps would alert a committee to the gender of a candidate. This caused a few females to not get advanced back in the bad old days. Conversely, a few pump-wearing candidates that failed to advance cried "foul!" and sued orchestras and AFM Locals for sexual discrimination.
Hence the mats.
Secrecy is very important when you really want to "hear" through all of the extraneous political noise in auditions.
Just like disqualifying a candidate if they make any kind of overt verbalization. This prevents letting a member of a committee know that you are the one in the seat at that moment, and therefore avoids another litigious magnet.
People cheat and the secrecy is there in an attempt to make the playing field truly level.
At least in theory. My experiences have shown me a number of holes in the system that I have actually observed being used in two auditions (one horn, one tuba) while a guest observer at two other orchestra's little parties. In both cases, the "cheating" was by done by the proctor, not the candidates. I got the nudge and the wink and I just nodded my head.
I wonder how often this happens. It would be very hard to prove.
I was pissed off for a week in both cases and considered calling the AFM Orchestra office. But, while totally overt, it was also totally "explainable".
I prefer not knowing who is playing on the other side of the screen; it is easier to focus on what I am hearing. And it allows us to move around some and yawn or roll our eyes without distracting the player.
And as far as knowing who we are listening to: who cares? They either can play or they can't. The resume means nothing when the horn comes up to the face.
We generally "interview" each finalist by asking questions or requesting something unusual of them and observing their poise and adaptability while under stress. This is VERY revealing and can really undo a great player with little experience. (Which is what we want to do so that we can find a player that won't come unglued on the stage when something goes awry. Experience counts a lot more than most practice room phenoms realize.)
BTW - How were your holidays?
Regards,
Wade "secrecy works well in some fields while not at all in others; it works in auditions" Rackley