BassDad

With a cheap PC, some free software and a bit of practice (we are talking hours not days), it is possible for an intelligent high school student to make edits in audio that are virtually undetectable, even to those with good ears who are listening for them. Not everyone disregards the rules, but it is not very hard to cheat. Many colleges and competitions are starting to require video recordings because undetectable edits require more skill, more sophisticated equipment and more time to make.

jazzzmomm

Ever the idealist, I would be very sad if my son hadn't had the valuable experience of doing take after take in a studio with the adult musicians who were cheering him on to do his best. Those final tracks are very special, and we'll keep them forever.

stringfollies

My S is no beginnger, but his CD was not perfect. We talked about editing it with the engineer and decided that his honesty was more important than being heard by schools. If they have any sense, they will know that the absolutely perfect recording is probably edited. His was good, got through the pieces - but there were a couple of small mistakes. But it was honestly about how he gets through pieces at this stage. He passed prescreening at one, but was denied at another with his sense of integrity intact. Luckily the one that rejected him was far from his first choice, but it was a bit of a punch in the gut to get this result before audition season had even begun! The standards must be very high there because he is pretty good - very advanced and almost polished. It probably saved us time and money and allowed him to audition at another school where he is probably more likely to be accepted in the end. He has a presence that plays much better live than on recording since his bowing technique is not yet flawless, but his sound is special and gorgeous. So the screening situation definitely put him at a disadvantage. Ironically, the teachers most interested in him are the ones who themselves are regular performers because they see his potential and relate to him. I think the schools that would screen out a student like this on the basis of a recording are probably doing themselves a disservice. Just an observation.

binx

I say this all the time about my S2! He is so much fun to watch.

And I agree with you about your other points as well. BassDad is right - so many schools are going with videos now, since editing is so easy. Even so, I would much prefer sending an "honest" recording, because I want my kids to be at places that are appropriate for them. I am familiar with several stories of kids getting in at places (schools and summer programs) where they did not really fit - As far as I know, it was due to a "lucky" audition rather than an edited CD. It turned out to be disastrous for all concerned. The teachers were dismayed at not getting what they were expecting, the other students dreaded playing with them, and - in one summer program specifically - the entire section was black-listed because they sounded so bad, due to just one person.

Just like with the other parts of CC, where folks are more concerned about name brand than fit, musicians also run that risk. How much better to get in at a school where they know what you can do, and they believe they can make you better.

ABlestMom

Good for your son! He made the right decision. Who knows why he didn't pass the pre-screening - many reasons have nothing to do with his talent at all! Don't dwell on that and remember things all happen for a reason

violadad

No one expects a prescreen audition CD to be perfect. (It is rare that any live performance is ever flawless.) My opinion is that the recording reflect the ability of the performer at that point in time on the requested selections.

It may take one, three, or thirty takes to get there. The key is to begin practice and prep well enough in advance to be able to be as close to "perfection" as is possible within one's talent and ability.

Time constraints, deadlines, tough material, recording cost issues may all well seem legitimate reasons for editing or piecing together a number of takes on a recording, but it doesn't reflect the truth.

An edited prescreen may get one to an audition. They may well play a near perfect audition, or they may repeat the same errors they could not overcome during recording takes. Mastery of the material, musicality, intonation, technique, and stage presence are part of the deciding factors in determining those who get in.

IMO, it does however speak to issues of integrity if one is willing to bend the rules to their advantage. The music world is small, and doors open based on one's reputation as well as one's ability.

My $.02, and just something to ponder for those embarking on this journey.

team_mom

Depending on what type of audition the kids are making, we use a sort of sliding level of errors.

We always include a "live" performance whenever possible, from a recital or performance. The judges know it's live because of the clapping at the end. That way, if there are some little bumps, and there always are, they know it was a one-shot live, unedited performance. Hopefully, it is a piece with great musicality, which the judges will weigh together with it being a live performance and against the errors.

Next level is the recorded accompanied pieces. When recording these, we are usually limited to the 3 takes of each movement that the accompanist will stay for and that my child can play before his chops start to wear. But these are naturally split according to movements, so there you can choose the best movements of each. This type of recording, hopefully will have less errors than the "live piece" because you have the ability to choose.

The last level is the unaccompanied pieces. Of course, in an unaccompanied recording EVERY, EVERYTHING is apparent, down to the clicking of the keys or the breaths they take (or even the slight sniffle of a sick musician), and in our personal sliding scale of error allotment, this type of recording should have the least number of errors, only because each one is more glaring. This may seem like the option to achieve the best recording as your child can record as many times as they can do it until they get it correct (or fall over from exhaustion), but experience has shown us that this type of recording is, by far, the hardest because the bar is set so high. Every note has to be centered, clear and resonant, all intonation is apparent..it's all out there.

I do think, however, there is some ambiguity in recording those unaccompanied pieces where there is a very long gap in which the accompanist would have been playing a solo, because you absolutely NEVER include those gaps in the recording. It begs the question whether it is legitimate to treat the different sections much like different movements. Usually, my kids will jump back in for the next section after a few seconds, but if they are winded from the from the first section, they have been known to continue with the next section on a separate take... If the piece were to be live or accompanied, the musician would have had more than a few seconds to recover and prepare for the next section. I'm not so sure that it is clear how to legitimately record this situation. This is how we have interpreted it.

Finally, we try to have more selections than we need in order to choose the best. My best "trick" is to try to schedule recitals for January so that we have recent, live recordings to choose from by Feb. 1, which is the date most of their audition CD's are due around.

I would be interested if others have a different perspective for assessing errors.

musicalfeet

Obviously i feel that editing every single detail to make a recording perfect is wrong, but say for example, you missed a CRUCIAL note. in my recording session, i missed the LAST note of my fingered octave run. that also happened to be the highest point of the whole piece. To edit that i believe is okay. and as long as you know you can master a piece by the live audition date i see no reason to record in chunks. And yes, i actually know of MANY students who edit their recording CDs. that's not saying they are bad musicians, but there are so many things you can't see in a recording. even with my editing, my CD didn't sound like me. I was still displeased with the result. Why? Because recordings don't capture as much emotion and contrast a live performance can. If the musically beautiful part of the piece is gone, what else is there left besides technique?

Of course I've heard of those kids that struggle at camps because of their too professionally recorded CDs, however it should be a teacher's job to honestly explain where the student's level is at, and whether or not he/she is suited for that camp/audition/competition.

I do agree there are certain kinds of editing that are wrong. I believe as long as you DID play everything, that kind of editing is fine. Afterall, the live performance shows all. Professional musicians edit their recordings too, thats why everyone likes to listen to them live- you never know what is going to happen. If you missed a run, as long as you are the one re-played the run for the edit, then that's fine. If one of your crucial notes are out of tune, as long as you're the one who played that passage again and got it right, editing that is fine too. It's just not okay to modify the notes themeslves to make them higher/lower, etc whatever else you can do with edits.

jazzzmomm

I'm confused about the inclusion of a recital type of performance on a prescreen CD--for most of my son's schools, this was prohibited. Maybe jazz is different,but I don't know why it would be.

But musicalfeet, near as I can tell, each performance on a prescreen needs to be recorded live at one time, not gone over to re-record even one note. When I described take after take in my post above, I meant to get that one live one that was the best of the day.

team_mom

Sorry to be unclear, jazzzmomm,
I was referring to audition CD's in general, but mostly for summer programs and competitions. All my D's college auditions were live or regional, so I wouldn't presume to know what is allowed on those CDs and my kids do not play instruments that require prescreen CD's, so that is an area I know nothing about.

violadad

jazzzmom, I'm a firm believer that a live recorded performance is oft times the best representation of one's ability, particularly in small ensemble play. Interaction between players, musicality, interpretation are easily determined. Again while rarely if ever "perfect" these live captures be it dvd or cd are as best as you'll get as a representation of overall ability.

I can see the arguments both for and against soloist (or with single accompaniment) recitals being used. On one hand, recital material is normally prepared to the highest level, and is not necessarily indicative of overall level of play. On the other hand, one would expect as much prep in preparing the requisites for an important audition, be it undergrad, camp/festival, grad or pro audition.

musicianmom

Just to add one thought to the prescreen considerations... (although this may be common knowledge)

I have been told by multiple parties involved in the audition prescreen process, that it is very rare for a CD to be listened to in its entirety. Perhaps the opening of each track, random spots while skipping through and maybe the end of a movement. It has become a standing joke with S - if there's something minor that he decides to let stand, he says "Oh well, maybe they won't hear that part. And if they do, they'll know I didn't edit!"

Disclaimer: I'm talking violin and prescreen - the above may not be true for voice or other instruments or for admission to programs in which the CD is the only or deciding factor.

musicalfeet

i think that would depend on the requirements on the pre-screen. obviously if its requested for it to be live then you can't do much about it. I'm just saying that even if a pre-screen CD isn't supposed to be edited, the pieces that you do record on your own can still be edited, and enough people do that anyway.

Procrastination

about a month ago, i was watching/listening to joshua bell on live at lincoln center for new years. after starting the tzigane, he was out of tune at several notes (long held notes mind you) high on the g. although he quickly fixed his intonation, you could see the orchestra chuckling to themselves in the background... almost like, "hah we wouldn't even make that mistake." yet... he's still considered one of the premier violinists of our generation.

live performances are not perfect, and neither are amateur recordings. moral of the story.

Baritonevoce

I am going to be sending in an audition cd/dvd (not sure yet) for an audition to UNT since I missed the live audition deadline. Correct me if I'm wrong when I say this but should I send the cd/dvd as is and not edit it at all? There aren't any guidelines regarding the format for the cd at all that I've found and the admissions officer told me that it would be included in the info on the site, which only said, cd, dvd, or tape...Now, when I say edit, I mean in terms of tracks. So, for example, if I messed up on a recording, then I could just use a different track? For a cd that is....or is this taboo? Also, does it matter whether I use a cd or dvd in terms of my audition, like, will one reflect better than the other?