Why do professional orchestras have auditions and not hire anyone?

July 14, 2011 at 10:51 PM ·

Calling up audition finalists for years and not hiring anyone ensures high playing quality and nice attitude of said finalists, but, more importantly, paying them no benefits... Yes, it is a little bit of a sham, especially considering that every orchestra has some dead wood clearly under-performing (although some making high six figures), but protected by the almighty Union, where clearly there's thousands of very capable candidates in the job pool...

July 14, 2011 at 11:08 PM ·

While I cannot give a spot-on answer to the OP, the question of whether there is any legal obligation on employers to advertise vacancies and interview (or, in music, audition) short-listed applicants, regardless of whether or not the employer intends to appoint, would bear consideration.  I can think of several careers over here, outside the music world, in which this situation applies.

July 14, 2011 at 11:44 PM ·

 I have been told from a reliable source that many of people who audition are more qualified than some of the orchestra members that judge new applicants.

That's probably really common, but in the end it means nothing.

One can only guess, but the reason that no one is hired is for the usual reasons: they rushed, they dragged, they played out of tune, they didn't taper phrases, they didn't vibrate, they didn't have a sound that would fit into the section, they were too aggressive, they weren't aggressive enough, their trill didn't work, they didn't play Mozart the way the concertmaster learned it.... you get the idea. There's no guarantee that on a given day the best candidate will show up. Perhaps they decided to audition for another orchestra on the same day. Who knows? 

It's not that all the candidates are all "bad" as Michael says, but that audition committees don't want to just hear competent, they want the total package. And regardless of where one goes to school or how many competitions one has won, impressing an entire committee is not easy.

July 15, 2011 at 01:25 AM ·

Greetings,

to be honest, I am not sure what the situation is these days,  but 25 plus years ago there were genuine problems with the players themselves that were very difficult to address.  To whit,  playing in a professional orchestra requires a very specific skill set and attitude which was not well trained at college.  the tendency in Colleges was to train players to be able to play the next big cocnerto,  and the next and the next and so on.  This was/is producing excellent violnists but I recall that many of didn`t particularly enjoy or even feel inspired by the orchestral training.  Thus there was/is a whole slew of graduatesd with enormous skills who need to learn how to be proessional orchestral players.  This problem wa sfelt to be so seere that orchestral training courses were set up by the BBC in Britain and also elsewhere in Europe i think.  I know the idea was discussed in ther States byut whether the actual idea was put into action or not I don`t know.  

On the other hand,  if -nobody- is really fully equipped to play in an orchestra when they graduate why not just pick the best player?

But then there are serious issues of sound.  A player who is so enormpusly talented they cut through the section like a knife is utterly useless.

Cheers,

Buri

July 15, 2011 at 03:00 AM ·

Perhaps other businesses advertise positions with no serious intent to fill them but I don't think it is ethical.  There is more involved when applying for an orchestra job than just filling out a resume.  If people auditioning are more qualified than the people judging it means that someone is good enough to play in the orchestra and judges are letting their egos get in the way of hiring someone. I have heard that over 100 people could audition for an important job.  One never knows if the best person is auditioning at any audition.  Then why ever hire anyone at all?   I am sure there is more than one person that auditions for any major orchestra that is more than qualified to play in the orchestra.  One might rule someone out based on an esoteric musical preference and overlook the best candidate.  No one plays perfectly.  To me it seems obvious that there are many people qualified to be hired in any audition. The hiring committees have to know that there are people good enough to fill the positions, they sometimes just don't think there is anyone good enough to win the position.

July 15, 2011 at 03:06 AM ·

 I suspect it's more complex than just player quality. I can't imagine that players are getting worse. These days many orchestras are having financial difficulties. It's cheaper not to hire anyone and just use subs, but then, on the other hand, they probably don't want to pass up someone who'd really fit well, either. I imagine the financial problems of hiring full-timers are causing more caution about filling the jobs than in the past. If you're not sure your orchestra is going to be around in two years and there's no extra money floating around, it kind of takes the pressure off of filling the empty seats.

July 15, 2011 at 05:25 AM ·

  For qualified answers to this from professional orchestra musicians and audition committees check out the forum on www.myauditions.com.  The forums are extremely limited to specific things in professional orchestras and doesn't cover what VCom does.

July 15, 2011 at 06:41 AM ·

 Ray,

I think some qualified answers were given here.

Scott

July 15, 2011 at 11:13 AM ·

 Michael you say that you can't imagine that players are getting worse. I think you should go to Youtube and search for Stokowski and Philadelphia and Mengelburg and Concertgebouw and other older recordings and reevaluate that. But that quality was over and done with 50 years ago. Today I suppose it is an organizational affectation of the orchestra to not fill a vacant seat in a string section. I can imagine that the possibility for a principal wind position but otherwise it would be ridiculous not to hire someone especially since almost all orchestras have a period of time before the new member gets "tenure".

July 15, 2011 at 12:39 PM ·

I think today economics certainly plays a part in it.   I also imagine that in certain orchestras there may be an  attitude that by holding to such high standards that none of the applicants are considered qualified  reflects well on the skills and abilities of the committee  and orchestra itself.  The particular full-time orchestra in my city has had a reputation of failing to fill string openings going back a good decade or more - and then having one or more of the rejected applicants immediately win a position with much more prestigious orchestras at quadruple the salary.  I can't seriously think that the rejected applicant was so awful at the first audition and a week later suddenly brilliant. 

   For the very top tier orchestras such pickiness is understandable but for middle of the road orchestras it speaks of pretension and insecurity.

July 18, 2011 at 01:36 PM ·

Often there are cliques on the jury that won't agree, and no one candidate then gets enough votes. In some orchestras, the conductor has a veto (or a vote that is so heavily weighted, it might as well be a veto.) 

Being on a jury is tiring--- hearing the same excerpts over and over, and people end up simply looking for the smallest issue to delete as many candidates as possible in the earlier rounds. It's a fairly unmusical process, and yes, then there are the egos...