CalgaryTbone wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 3:19 pm
OK, think of it this way: Imagine you come an audition for my orchestra. The committee discusses your performance, and is unanimously disappointed - negative remarks about sound, pitch and time. Then, the recording that was supposed to go to just you somehow gets sent to the wrong person (clerical error) and that person puts it on the Internet. Lawyers start getting rich and your career and the orchestra's reputation all take a major hit.
Now this is just an example that would likely never happen, and I'm not suggesting that you are a bad player when I've never heard you or met you. There's always a danger of a recording getting out when it exists, and it is a really bad idea (just ask Trump these days!).
If you want comments after an audition, ask for them - most places will accommodate that. No one has any reason to lie in those comments, but if their comments are like mine, they won't be extensive. Just the nature of the day that for most people you can't write a full descriptive essay for each player, so there are lots of shorthand notes like "time on triplets". That should be enough for you to make improvements for the next time.
And lastly. yes auditions are job interviews. I've actually sat on a hiring committee for a job interview for an office position here once a while ago. Those applicants were competing too in a way, but the bottom line is that only one person can be hired - everyone else is disappointed. I can also say that in that environment, it was important to not let any negative comments about how those applicants fared leave the room afterwards. It's considered to be good business etiquette to keep that private.
JS
I'm appreciative of your comments, this is exactly where I was hoping the discussion would head.
In regards to comments or feedback post audition, personally I have always been grateful and receptive when offered. A few years ago (during the corona ordeal) I was forced to submit a tape for a very good orchestra I had worked with on a few occasions before. I was very interested in working with them full time. I made finals so didn't win (obviously) so I was disappointed but it was fine, I know how this process goes and the winner deserved it just as much as anyone else. Very kindly the orchestra said feedback was available and I was very interested. I wasn't living in the same country as the orchestra at the time so I asked for my feedback to be emailed or messaged. They said that wasn't possible, it HAD to be a phone call from the principle trombone player. I braved the time difference and spoke with the principle, who to be clear, I am grateful made the time to do it.
It's very hard to explain all this with no specifics, but the comments I received were very mixed. A few I could see related to the recording I sent but some were very unusual and bizzare. Those ones I could easily double check for myself because I had sent a recording. I have nothing but my word but a few of the comments I received simply couldn't have been in relation to my recording. I'm not at all saying this person outright lied, and I have nothing but my own suspicions as to why the outcome turned the way that it did and why those commemts were made, but from then on out I have always asked for any feedback offered in writing.
The motivation is not to embarass anyone or "prove" something, but I think people are more careful and honest about what they say if it's clearly written from them. And I think that's important in an industry with so many people who spend so many hours on something they really care about when the employment process can at times appear vague. Of course, I could be completely wrong and in the instance I've referred to im just not a good enough musician to understand what was said to me. But I dont think so.
In regards to the (hyperthetical) recording being sent to the wrong person..... im ok with that. What I mean is, I think the hiring process should be a little less one sided and in this hyperthetical you have presented, if potential candidates know a specific organisation is unprofessional enough to send the recording to the wrong person, or have people in their organisation who say/describe players in a way that is (in their eyes) unwarranted in a public capacity, it might make some applicants think twice about whether they actually want to apply for that organisation when they advertise positions. I think that would be good in the long run for both parties.
Auditions being a normal job interview..... maybe. But I dont think this industry is normal and the process (to me) has a number of aspects that are unique to the industry. You can find similarities without looking too hard but the differences are there.... and significant in my opinion.