[Trombone-l] Cleveland Orch Trombone Article in newspaper

[Gabriel Langfur]

The problem with this as I see it John, is that you are assuming the worst of that Ballet orchestra committee. They want somebody who will perform great in their situation, and they have enough subs in to have a sense of how people do once they actually sit in the chair. 

Over the years they have had an excellent track record of using this contract clause in an unquestionably fair manner. They have not used it to appoint their best friends regardless of playing ability. When they have appointed without audition - which has certainly not been every time a chair was vacant, or even the majority of the time - they have chosen somebody who plays great and has absolutely the right mental skills for that particular situation. In the trombone section at least, they have sometimes had subs in who played excellent sub list auditions but couldn't figure out how to be flexible enough in real time for the pit orchestra situation. 

In my observation, this practice strikes a good balance. It may look like it's open to abuse, but in practice they have used this tool fairly and judiciously. In this particular case, it helps that the music director is an excellent musician who has the absolute respect of the orchestra. They want to do their best for him and the situation, both when they play and when they sit down for the serious task of hiring.

Gabe

----- Original Message ----
From: "JENKINS,JOHN J" <posaune at ufl.edu>
To: Trb. List <trombone-l at server5.samford.edu>
Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2007 8:38:42 AM
Subject: Re: [Trombone-l] Cleveland Orch Trombone Article in newspaper


On Sat May 26 07:49:25 EDT 2007, Gabriel Langfur 
<glangfur at yahoo.com> wrote:
------------------------
The Boston Ballet orchestra has an interesting system in their 
contract for filling vacant chairs. They convene a committee 
(which includes the music director) and meet to discuss the 
players in town, the frequent subs they've had in, etc.  Then they 
hold a secret paper ballot vote, and if they have a unanimous 
winner from that they don't hold an audition and simply invite 
that player to fill the chair. One dissenting vote means that they 
then hold an audition.
> 
> Some might say it's unfair to do it this way, but I disagree. I 
> think this takes into account the human side of the equation 
> quite well, acknowledging the importance of knowing how well 
> somebody actually does in the situation without pretending that a 
> blind audition is the pinnacle of "fairness."
> 
> Gabe
> _______________________________________________

Hi Gabe,

With all due respect, I feel that blind auditions are no doubt the 
pinnacle of "fairness". It's the only way of selecting someone 
based on their ability without any bias or trickery. I mean, sure, 
you may know of someone in Boston who's ridiculously amazing on 
oboe and who'd fit in with the orchestra like a nice leather 
glove, but is there probably someone else in the surrounding area 
who would be better suited for the job? There's a good chance 
there are, and vice versa. But no one knows for sure, which is why 
blind auditions are the way to go. It would be unfair to the other 
oboists who bust their butts on a daily basis to not even have a 
shot at such an opportunity simply because they don't have as many 
connections... especially for extremely talented musicians just 
getting on the scene. And I'm not knocking networking at all -- I 
think we all benefit from it. I just don't think it's appropriate 
for ensembles such as orchestras where significantly longer stints 
are expected of you.

John Jenkins
[]xxxx[]::::::::::::::::>

"Most of the trouble in the world is caused by people wanting to 
be important." -T.S. Elliot-

_______________________________________________
Trombone-l mailing list
Trombone-l at maillists.samford.edu
http://maillists.samford.edu/mailman/listinfo/trombone-l