<p>Not to drag this on infinitely, but…if a student is a wonderful actor and not-so-great singer, many colleges will offer them admission to the Acting program, and deny acceptance to the Musical Theater program. Thus indicating that they see and appreciate the acting talent; but they are looking for strong singers in the MT programs. I think we all agree that acting ability is highly important; but college MT programs are specifically looking for strong singers as well.</p>
<p>To answer one of your original questions - The University of Cinncinnati is going to expect you to be able to dance if you pursue the MT program. However, they also have the acting program which is just as great. I have an S, and I think that the schools do not expect as much from boys when it comes to dancing. Many of them will say that they just want to see if they can move. Either way, have fun with the process - so many great people out there who can help guide you.</p>
<p>I’m with Soozievt on this one…you HAVE to be able to sing. My D just finished her sophomore promotionals at a top MT conservatory…in her own words, she was reauditioning for the program. They had her sing three songs, no monologue or dance. </p>
<p>PS: Opera singers act, too.</p>
<p>Just chiming in here, too. 
Of course, you need to be able to sing if you want to get into a musical theater BFA program. But I do think that different BFAs have slightly different emphases. The poster above (hi, Skwidjymom!) has a kid at BoCo, which is a program that trains in all three areas of MT (singing, acting, dancing) but emphasizes singing and music. My kid goes to NYU Tisch/CAP21, which makes no bones about the fact that they train “actors who sing.”</p>
<p>To get back to the original question posed about the importance of singing, it is MY opinion that the more selective BFA MT schools (assuming most BFA MT schools look to produce triple threats) look at 60% singing. 20% dancing, 20% acting. When I traveled around the country looking at prospective schools, many of the students who were involved in the orientation mentioned that they were a singer, actor, mover or singer, dancer and learning acting or equally skilled at all three areas. But first and foremost they indicated that they were admitted due to their singing abilities. The only casting calls I ever read in the trade papers were for singers who can dance or dancers who can sing. Are there exceptions, sure, but in this business, you want to play the percentages.</p>
<p>So MyFavoriteAries, take the advice earlier in the post and get a good vocal coach so you can be at your best if you want to pursue Musical Theater. Good luck</p>
<p>I want to clarify that obviously you have to be able to sing. However-it is my opinion that if you are a decent singer and a strong actor you will be more in demand.</p>
<p>breezer…I think there are really two conversations here then. Who is in demand or what sort of performer one prefers or does well on stage is one topic. But I feel the topic was more about MT college auditions and which skills are needed to do well for admissions. Does one need all three skills? Can you be strong in two and show potential in a third? Can voice be the weakest of the three or simply show potential? And so on for COLLEGE ADMISSIONS. I think the answers to these questions are not necessarily the same as to who gets work or what one prefers to see in a performer on stage. MT college admissions are extremely competitive and so I believe people are saying that being weaker in voice than in acting and dance will have lower odds of admissions into a BFA in MT program than someone stronger in voice and dance but weaker in acting or someone stronger in voice and acting but weaker in dance. And at some schools like NYU, Ithaca, Syracuse, and CMU, if you are stronger in acting than voice, you may be considered for the acting program over the MT program, as one audition can qualify you for either degree program.</p>
<p>I can’t say for sure whether singing is the MOST important (I’m still auditioning and have only heard back from one school that definitely places singing above all else), but from what I’ve been able to gather, it’s kind of a 2 out of 3 deal. I don’t know if I agree with that, but I definitely hope it’s true since I’m in a similar bind, I’m a strong actor and singer but I and desperately need dance training. 
Best of luck to you!!!</p>
<p>As an auditioner from this year, I totally understand where the original poster was coming. I have been really blessed in my successes this year(so much that I have stopped auditioning) and I really have to agree with breezer in the sense that in musical THEATRE there is no delineation between singing and acting because they should ALWAYS happen at the same time. I can also say that there were alot of people at my auditions who were good singers, like someone said it really is a matter of oppinion because there are pop-rock, soulful, legit, etc., and I really think my success was due to the fact that I consider myself an actor first and foremost. The quality of your voice is always going to be an oppinon, some will live for it and some will hate on you for it but Truthfulness in acting is undeniable/unquestionable. I would really urge prospective students not to neglect that. But like everyone else said you have to work on your voice and train as much as possible but realize you are not a recording artist…youre an ACTOR :D</p>
<p>Yes, I will agree that Acting should always come first…but singing is MUST be there! You cannot do MT if you can’t sing…you might not have to be the best songbird out there, but you need to be able to sing well. There are non-singing roles in musicals out there and there are character roles that don’t require amazing singing, but whenever I look at the bios of the performers in those roles, their background is mainly straight acting. They usually also received their training in primarily straight acting. So if you don’t sing very well, straight acting can be an option…you can pursue dance and singing in your own time. </p>
<p>Some schools I know look specifically for singers first, though, I believe. I can name one who says this even in their info sessions I heard. I did not audition for this school because of this since it differs with my philosophy, but it’s an example that schools with this mindset do exist. This one I speak of is one of the “TOP” schools that is also in what some people refer to as the “trifecta”. LOL. I think most of you know which one I speak of. It’s a great school. Just not my own cup of tea!</p>
<p>Just adding my perspective/opinion. I think when it comes to employment and shows that you have to be foremost a great actor and a great actor that acts out the song and agree with prior comments if there was a choice between a great actor or a great voice the great actor is most critical. </p>
<p>As far as college auditions I would put the voice first. I think the ability to sing is at least in part a natural talent. I’m sure everyone has met someone who with 20 yrs of lessons still wouldn’t be able to carry a tune. With training a good voice will learn proper vocal control, breathing, etc and become better. But I’m not sure they will become as drastically better as there is the potential to become as drastically better as an actor. Script analysis, character development, studying different acting techniques such as method, Stanislavski, Meisner, etc I think has the potential to change someone with potential in far greater ways going a longer distance.</p>
<p>See I disagree. Though it is difficult to come across an amazing voice. Talent is also a natural talent that often is very difficult to train people into. Voice is just like the ability to act. You either got it or you don’t. But essentially the most important thing is just being able to perform. You gotta capture the audiences attention. </p>
<p>Hoewever- Agreed, colleges do look for voices as the foremost proof of talent.</p>
<p>Yes, voice is important, but so too is your ability to act through your song. Are you connected to the song? Are you believable? Do you feel the emotions your songs convey? Remember, it’s musical theatre, so acting should not be reserved just for the monologue. This doesn’t mean over-acting your song, but giving an honest performance true to the meaning of the lyrics.</p>
<p>I’m sorry for my typo: “Acting is also a natural talent” ***</p>
<p>I want to say, without causing a ruckus, this is a rather impossible thread. When it comes down to auditions the most important aspect is clearly something that varies wildly on a case by case basis. In the case of your audition for admission to a program you would be well advised to know what that program seems to to value most highly in its own curriculum. That would give you a clue.<br>
In the real world, that is actually auditioning for a job, I believe the real answer to this question has endless parameters. By the way, the basic conceit here leaves out dance, height, weight, looks - these all play huge roles in casting. If you look great for the show and dance like a dream and can pass on vocals and acting - this is often enough to earn your first equity card! Here is what I really wanted to say - you are missing the boat - really, standing on the pier talking about acting vs. singing, while the ship is pulling away. The real deal is to know your type, work on that, and come into the audition ready willing and able to act, sing, and dance. This is what every audition panel, every casting director, every agent dreams about. By the way, in the real world as you are attempting to break into the business, you often typically do not get to begin to show you can act until after you have danced and sung - your choice as to which is first, as you can attend dancers who sing audition or the singers who dance audition - only after you pass that muster do get a chance to read for the show.
For now the truth is if you are outstanding at two of these areas and willing to work on all areas - this is typically good enough to get you in the door at most secondary educational programs.</p>
<p>mtdog71 hits the nail on the head. You really need to dig into each school to get a handle on the prioritization and weight given to singing, acting and dance. When my daughter was auditioning for schools, there was quite a variance. For example, at Syracuse, you needed to earn a score of 4 or 5 on 2 out of the 3 disciplines with the third not lower than a 3 to get an artistic acceptance (we asked at a visitation and were told this outright). At Ithaca, there wasn’t even a dance component to the audition and at Emerson, the dance component was the most simplistic and basic. At UArts, the year my daughter auditioned, it seemed that the school was giving greatest priority to voice, then acting and then dance (my daughter’s audition scores and comments, which she later found out about, strongly confirmed this conclusion). Things can even change from year to year as the mix of students in the program changes. Best bet is to just come best prepared as you can be in all 3 disciplines without trying to second guess what the school is really looking for although, as mtdog71 suggests, looking at the curriculum can certainly provide guidance about the balance and focus of the program which can influence the audition process. Better yet, asking outright may also get you surprisingly candid responses which was one reason (of several) that we visited each school the year before my daughter auditioned.</p>
<p>MTDOG71 - well said</p>