Posted by Matt G on September 14, 2001 at 13:08:52:
In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Colorado anyone?? posted by Bryan on September 13, 2001 at 23:46:56:
Without knowing the particular situation, it can be said that if the orchestra's needs are fully met with current personell and that person is compatible with the other personell, then it is a gamble to take someone who is not in another class by themselves as a replacement. The group could hire a "social moron" who insults people and has no ability to relate with others in the ensemble. If his/her section mates are not happy with him as a person, what does the rest of it mean. Yes, the public does pay for performances (product), and deserves to hear the best, but like in the real world, the business (ensemble) with the best teamwork and motivation 99.99% of the time will put out the best product. We could outfit an orchestra with the best players in the world, but if they didn't have a certain level of comraderie, then the group pshycologically will suffer. Once that weakness occurs, then the music will suffer.
I am not saying that the other auditioners are people who would not be compatable, but does the comittee know that? Probably not. I respect the outcome of the process. Like I have posted before, tuba players and all other musician's need more business and real world training before leaving our insitutions. This will give them a "heads up" to what is going on in the audtition and allow them to evaluate it on their own terms. Also, we could be able to market ourselves in a ways that we could take a smaller job and create an image of ourself that would make other groups feel it neccessary that they have us as part of our team. I think that this is how some of the appointment without auditions occur. If we know a persons product and their ability and their personality and are satisfied with all, then we would seek them out for availability. Remember music IS business.
Matt G