Klarinet Archive - Posting 001356.txt from 1998/04

From: Roger Garrett <rgarrett@-----.edu>
Subj: re: audition tapes
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 19:29:15 -0400

On Thu, 23 Apr 1998, Jonathan Cohler wrote:
> What do you mean by "invited to the audition"? The tape IS the first-round
> audition. Do you mean invited to the 2nd round? If so, I would suspect it
> is a very small number, as it is for those who audition live as well.

Semantics Jonathan......let's not get snobby again.....and begin with the,
"go back what I wrote" stuff! You know as well as everyone that you don't
invite a tape to an audition! If a person sends a resume and tape, as
required as part of the APPLICATION stage, no one has been invited to the
first round. The people who are invited to the second round and finals
don't have to send a tape. Those invited to the first round are those who
send a tape. You can call it the second round if it makes you feel better
and you can further your argument, but the play on semantics doesn't
change what it is......part of the application process. And, it doesn't
matter if they say it is treated the same as a live audition or not....I
guarantee that if they don't like the first six measures, the tape gets
pulled off the machine......they don't do that to a live auditionee. It is
almost a certainy that the concept of having less of a chance is greater
using the tape - if you screw up the first 6 measures of a tape....bye
bye.....not so in a live audition.

> Are you assuming that they don't listen to the tapes? I suppose this is
> possible, but certainly unethical. The manager I spoke with said that all
> tapes are listened to and are considered auditions just the same as live
> auditions.

I didn't read that he said that at all. Where did it say that???? He
said hear them audition........it seems plausible that the meaning is
audition .......as in live. It is very standard to have the tape be
considered a part of the application - not part of the audition -
regardless of what anyone says.

Roger Garrett
IWU