Auditions V - What do you prioritize?

After the long audition process you've gone through (well, long enough, anyway!), you have to make decisions as to who's in your choir(s). Difficult choices will always be a part of this if you have an auditioned choir. What do you prioritize? How do you make these choices?

 

The comments here are for those who have relatively advanced singers, so this (as with much of this series) might not speak to as large a number of conductors. But I hope it's still helpful and of interest.

 

First, how do you treat returning members of the ensemble? Are they automatically in? Do they have any "skin in the game" during auditions? I've almost always required re-auditions, but it's been incredibly rare for me not to take a previous member of the choir. Loyalty (assuming they've been a responsible member of the choir) goes both ways!

 

However, I've known of a few conductors who rate their singers on a scale and take the top rated singers, without regard to previous membership. A legitimate choice--but what do you think? Do you do this? Could you do this?

 

Second, one can prioritize (this is broadly stated!) either vocal sound or musicianship/ear. What's most important to you? The very best voices? The best sightreaders?

 

Obviously, this is a vast oversimplification, but there is an element here that is important--your choices will have consequences. If you find yourself frustrated with the speed with which your choir can work, did you prioritze quality of voice too highly? Or, if you're unhappy with the sound of your choir, did you leave some really fine singers with great instruments out of your choir because their reading was poor?

 

If we all had the perfect situation, we'd have fantastic voices connected with unbelievable musicianship and experience--but then we probably wouldn't be a good enough conductor to work with them!

 

In reality, choices are a balance--one looks for the combination of voice/musicianship which will create the best choir. The real choices are at the margins--with the majority of the singers it'll be pretty clear whether they belong in the choir or not. But decisions for the last few singers in each section can be difficult (even agonizing) and here's where the needs of the ensemble can help with the decision. Do you need a particular voice type (a high soprano? soprano with a warm lower voice?)? Have you already chosen some beautiful voices for the section, but some whose reading is poor? In that case, you might choose a fantastic reader (without a great voice) who can help that section learn more quickly and give musical leadership. On the other hand, you might need a voice that other voices can use as a model of the kind of sound you need--even if their musicianship isn't of the highest level.

 

And what about the intangibles (perhaps not so intangible!)--personality, leadership qualities--those things we might put into the overall term, "character." Is the singer committed, enthusiastic, energetic, a good leader? These are elements we also should consider.

 

If you have thoughts about how you make your final choices, please share them!

 

All the best with your choirs this year--may your audition choices turn out to be wonderful ones.

 

Auditioning Singers IV: Group Auditions/Recalls

For many of us with advanced choirs, a group recall audition by section is an important part of the selection process. It's a possible next step after the individual auditions, which can serve several purposes:

• a chance to compare voices that you may have heard over several days (we just heard around 200 singers in our auditions)
• trying out different combinations of voices to see which voices work together best in a section
• to check musicianship and ability to follow rehearsal suggestions in a different way
• to set placement within the section

It takes time to do this, but it can be quite valuable.

 

It's challenging to remember specifics of voices (when you don't know them) across several days--some conductors video-tape singers so they can go back. But even with that, the direct comparison of voices is far more accurate. Size of voice, color, and other attributes are then heard in context.

 

I typically have called back 4-5 more singers than I will take in a section--if I'll take 12 sopranos, for example, I might recall 16-17 singers. I've done either a familiar song ('My Country 'tis of thee') or some repertoire from the upcoming year. My Country 'tis of thee is done in Bb (lower voices) and F (higher voices), with the key of G for first sopranos and tenors, which tells me a lot. I've also used music that's new to the singers, where I want to hear how quickly they may pick up ideas for phrasing or sound that I may suggest.

 

Joshua Bronfman wrote an interesting post on how preconceptions may affect our perceptions of the singers we hear and asked if any of us did blind auditions (that's the norm in the professional orchestral world). I did exactly that for about 8 years at PLU. I wrote about it in an earlier blog:

 

With my PLU choirs I always had a group audition, by section, after the individual auditions. This allowed me to find a bit more about musicianship, how quickly the singer could apply musical ideas, and to see how voices might work together.

 

If, for example, I were considering 16 sopranos for 12 spots available in the Choir of the West, I’d have an hour to work with them. In the last ten years or so of these auditions I did them “blind.” When the singers came in they’d pick a number (1 through 16) out of a box (they’d write their names on the piece of paper and hand it back at the end, so I’d have my “key” to who I was listening to). After introducing the process, I’d turn my back to the singers and call out numbers for particular singers. Of course, I could identify some singers’ voices right away, but I didn’t focus on guessing—simply on listening to the voice. I think new singers liked this “anonymity,” and later I was sometimes genuinely surprised by the results as I ranked the singers.

 

I’d usually begin with a vocal exercise, and hear all singers one after another. Then we’d work on a passage from a work I’d chosen (usually something from upcoming repertoire). This helped me find out how quick singers were in learning something new and how musically they might sing. I’d then begin to combine different voices to see how they worked together.

 

I found this a valuable part of my audition process.

 

Sorting out how voices work together can be done in a variety of ways. If you have a choir with a large number of returning members, this part of the audition can put new singers amongst returning ones, which allows you the possibility of "plugging in" the new singers and hearing how they fit. My colleague, Jerry McCoy, uses his recall in this way.

 

My former colleague at PLU, Richard Nance, uses his group recall for placement in the choir, but by arranging the voices from bright to dark color, which then will help him determine the arrangement of singers.

 

If you haven't done such a group recall, give it a try!

Auditioning Singers III - Musicianship/Ear

Another thing to test for in an audition is musicianship: sightreading and ear skills, primarily.

 

There are several things to test:

• sightreading pitches
• sightreading rhythms
• the ability of the singer to hear something and reproduce it vocally

Given the level of your singers, you will want to choose examples to read that start with something easy (where a singer of yours should be able to sing most notes correctly), then progressively move to more difficult examples. I've usually had 5-6 examples and will often skip some examples if the singer can sightread the first one easily. They progress in difficulty in both pitches and rhythms.

 

Remember, I'm auditioning college-level singers, so a first example might be one with fairly simple rhythms, a melody without accidentals and no difficult leaps. The next example might have more accidentals, tougher leaps, modulation, etc. The most difficult one should be one that separates the really good sightreader from the average or even pretty good one. I've used a few exercises with accompaniment or little duets as well. P.G. Alldahl has a great accompanied pseudo-baroque exercise he's composed  (used for a number of years with the world Youth Choir), but some little twists that only the best sightreaders would get.

 

I leave it up to the singer to sing on text (if there is one--often there is not), a neutral syllable of their choice, or solfege syllables).

 

In some circumstances I've also done separate rhythmic exercises. This has the advantage of better testing the separate abilities to read rhythm and pitch.

 

With more advanced choirs I've also used exerpts from Lars Edlund's Modus Novus, which lets me know if the singer can deal with non-tonal music and read intervals by themselves without a tonal context. I could also use an example from a work I'm planning to do (unlikely that they'd know it!).

 

Something that others have done is to have a returning quartet from the choir, who are prepared on the music to be read (excerpts of real music in this case), and have the auditionee replace the one with their voice part. This has the advantage of being more realistic--much more like the experience of actually reading in a choir, since you hear the other parts.

 

Since many of our singers do NOT read well, it is often useful to test the ear, or tonal memory, of the singer. My feeling has always been that if a singer has an excellent tonal memory, they will have the capability of learning to read more quickly--not to speak of the fact that they will be able to learn their part more quickly even before they learn to read (or read better).

 

If you haven't done this before, you can find many examples from a quick google search (or, in fact, on choralnet). The idea is again to begin with easy examples and gradually make them more challenging. I've usually done this in addition to sight-reading, others have done it only if the singer doesn't read well. Dale Warland does his with lots of changes of expression (dynamics, tempo, articulation) and looks to see if the singer picks up on those as well. Robert Fountain used to check applicants to his graduate conducting program by playing the first 4-5 notes of a 12-tone row, then keep adding a couple notes until the applicant couldn't get any more pitches.

 

However, with a choir where sightreading is not expected of every singer, tonal memory exercises can tell the conductor a lot. I suspect the same is true for children's choirs (but please tell me more about what you do).

 

Any instrumentalist would be expected to read dynamics, articulations, etc. We rarely do this with singers, but a professional choir could expect this. When I conducted the Seattle Symphony Chorale, I remember being startled when an auditionee sang all the dynamics on the page, something no other singer had done. Perhaps with advanced choirs, we should expect more!

 

So, once you've figured out what's appropriate to use for your singers, what else goes into this part of the audition?

 

I think most of you know that sightreading in an audition freaks out a lot of singers! So, how best to do it?

 

When I was at PLU, I did the exercises myself as part of the initial audition. I left the sightreading/tonal memory for the end of the audition--as I said in the previous post, I want to begin with something that the singer will find most comfortable. So the order might be: prepared piece, vocalises, sightreading, tonal memory. At UNT our grad students test sightreading before they come into the room where we hear them, so we simply get a score on sightreading from 1-5. Tonal memory is usually tested only if they don't sightread well.

 

Of course, you may want to know more, particularly the kind of motivation the singer will have to learn, or whether they even can learn their part outside of rehearsal.

 

I had an interesting conversation with my friend Richard Nance this summer (I hope many of you heard his fantastic performance with the PLU Choir of the West in Dallas this past March). Richard does two additional short auditions for that choir. One is to assign an excerpt of a piece to be learned that they get about 24 hours ahead of when they'll do it. It's not easy and has at least some counterpoint. The singers are assigned to octets and meet with Richard the next day for a 15 minute rehearsal on the music. This gives him an idea of not only if they can learn their part, but how they respond in a rehearsal. Are they flexible if he asks them to change something? How quickly do they respond/learn? The singers often get together in a larger group the night before to work on the music, but he says that's fine--it just shows their motivation.

 

In addition, he does a short individual audition with each singer in which he gets to know them better, does the sightreading part of the audition, but also has them play their part on the piano with a piece from upcoming repertoire. This gives him a further idea of whether the singer is able to learn a part or fix a problem section on their own.

 

I think it's a fascinating and great way to find out more about the potential singers for his top choir.

 

If you have additional ideas for auditions or thoughts about what I've said, please share in the comments.

Auditioning Singers I

I'm baaack! Hope you've had a good summer break!

 

If you missed the end of my intonation series last spring, I'll post links at the end of this blog.

 

Auditions are something most of us do to evaluate potential singers for our choirs. Some do it in the spring, some in the late summer/fall just before the new academic year/season begins.

 

Of course, the level of your group will determine how elaborate and challenging your audition process will be. Some of you may not do formal auditions (you may conduct a non-auditioned or "ya'll come" choir), but even then evaluation of your individual singers can be helpful at some point (and potentially helpful to them, too).

 

Any audition will look to evaluate:

• vocal ability/skill
• ear
• musicianship/sightreading
• and possibly ensemble skills

In addition, it's important to evaluate the personality of the singer: are they a team player? How motivated might they be to work on music outside of rehearsal? Will they be suportive of other singers in the choir?

 

I'll take each of these topic in turn. As always, I value your feedback and opinions--you'll greatly add to the dialogue and knowledge base. Read the comments in the intonation series for wonderful examples!

 

Here are links to the intonation series, in order:

Intonation I

What is good intonation?

What systems do you use?

Guest post: Barbershop

Voice and vowel

More on voice and vowel

Rhythm and ensemble

A few other vocal issues

Calibrating the ear - John Goldsmith

Calibrating the ear II - John Goldsmith

Tonal memory--a two-edged sword

What to do when the choir goes flat

Answering questions from comments

Final thoughts--and Eric Ericson on intonation

Auditions 4

While at the Chorus America/NPAC conference in Denver, a group of conductors talked about auditions. Some additional ideas for auditioning:

- using excerpts from standard repertoire that all singers have to prepare (e.g. "And He Shall Purify" from Messiah to show ability with coloratura)

- conduct singer in an assigned excerpt to see how they follow/react to conductor

- additional exercises for ear testing: playing chords or clusters and asking singer to sing the middle pitch played

- do sight-reading in a quartet (you'd have a returning quartet on tap--new singers would replace one of the members and read)

- language: have 4-5 excerpts in different languages for the auditionee to read out loud

Auditions 3

With my PLU choirs I always had a group audition, by section, after the individual auditions. This allowed me to find a bit more about musicianship, how quickly the singer could apply musical ideas, and to see how voices might work together.

If, for example, I were considering 16 sopranos for 12 spots available in the Choir of the West, I’d have an hour to work with them. In the last ten years or so of these auditions I did them “blind.” When the singers came in they’d pick a number (1 through 16) out of a box (they’d write their names on the piece of paper and hand it back at the end, so I’d have my “key” to who I was listening to). After introducing the process, I’d turn my back to the singers and call out numbers for particular singers. Of course, I could identify some singers’ voices right away, but I didn’t focus on guessing—simply on listening to the voice. I think new singers liked this “anonymity,” and later was sometimes genuinely surprised by the results as I ranked the singers.

I’d usually begin with a vocal exercise, and hear all singers one after another. Then we’d work on a passage from a work I’d chosen (usually something from upcoming repertoire). This helped me find out how quick singers were in learning something new and how musically they might sing. I’d then begin to combine different voices to see how they worked together.

At PLU this was easy to do, since we let sections know when recall auditions would be in advance (and they were held during regular choir rehearsal times, so we knew it wouldn’t conflict with another class). I did this a couple times with Choral Arts, but only if I couldn’t make a decision in a particular section with just the individual auditions. And with Pro Coro I only did it once when the choices were very close in the soprano section. I’d love to do this more often, but finding a time when all potential members of a section can do it is difficult, particularly since I have limited time available, too.

Other thoughts about the auditioning process? What works for you?

Auditions 2

So what have my audition procedures been?

This varies with the level of ensemble, of course. I want to hear something of the quality of the voice (sound, range, intonation, etc.) and also want to find out about musicianship (sight-reading/ear). I also listen for things that may cause problems: strident singing in a part of the range, an unusual vibrato (very fast or slow, very wide), lack of musicality, etc.

With all my groups this has involved singing something for me first (or the panel that hears auditions)—at PLU we’d accept a hymn, Christmas carol, or other simple song from a new auditionee, but returning singers were expected to sing an art song of some type. With Choral Arts this usually meant a couple songs that contrast and show different aspects of a singer’s voice. Pro Coro has long had a tradition of singing a Bach recitative and aria (in addition to an art song of the singer’s choice). This is difficult for some singers, but appropriate for a professional choir, and it’s been interesting to see how much one can learn from the singing of a recitative: whether the singer has a sense of style, of rhetoric, how well they hear the underlying harmonies that are implied in a Bach recitative, etc. This tradition (Bach recitative and aria) predated me with Pro Coro, but it tells a lot, so I’ve kept it.

Depending on what I hear in the music chosen by the singer, I may want to do some vocalizes for range if the repertoire hasn’t shown me enough of that, or even do a portion of one of the songs again, asking for something different (less vibrato, a bigger sound, a change of phrasing). This not only tells me something the song didn’t, but in the case of a new singer, how quickly they can adapt to instruction.

Figuring out musicianship in someone you’ve never heard before is difficult. I’ve always included some sight-reading (the level varies, according to the choir), but I also know that this is something that makes many singers very nervous—and they don’t show what they can really do. And it’s also not the kind of sight-reading one does in a choral situation. Further, it doesn’t say how motivated the singer will be to learn music. I’ve had some singers who aren’t terrific sight-readers, but will do whatever is necessary to be prepared (and the opposite—singers who read quite well, but aren’t willing to do any work outside of rehearsal, even if they can’t get a particular passage). You can only know this in returning singers, since you’ve had the experience of working with them.

Consequently, I’ve also often done tonal memory exercises (playing simple patterns that the singer repeats by ear, then gradually getting more difficult). Sometimes, especially with the students at PLU, this told me a lot about how quick the singer’s ear is and more about how quickly they might learn. When I watched Dale Warland do his auditions, he usually played examples at different speeds, dynamics and articulations, to see if the singer picks up on those details as well as pitch and rhythm.

With new singers, I also want to get a sense of their personality, how they might work in a group, etc. Everyone fills out a form telling me their background: voice training, music classes, instruments played (and how long), choirs they’ve sung in, etc. Follow-up questions at the audition might elicit more information and I also may have a follow-up phone call with a voice teacher or former choir director. All of this augments the information I have to work with in making a decision.

More about group/ensemble auditioning in the next post.

Auditioning 1

Nobody likes auditions.

I don’t think that’s too controversial a statement! Necessary evil? An important part of creating the best possible choir? Deliberate torture? All of the above?

Bill Eddins, conductor of the Edmonton Symphony Orchestra, wrote on his blog about the auditioning process for a new principal trumpet for the orchestra. He took a fair amount of heat for this (and answered it well here), but it raises interesting questions.

And this is on my mind since I’m just finishing auditions for Pro Coro Canada, so . . . some thoughts about auditions and auditioning.

There are, of course, many un-auditioned choirs, and good reasons for having such choirs. I have to say, though, that with the exception of my church choirs (and it’s been some time since I was a church musician, essentially between 1970 and 1980), I’ve usually worked with auditioned choirs. Auditioning—evaluating both new and returning singers—is for me a necessary part in attaining (and keeping) a high-level choir.

I also understand auditioning isn’t an enjoyable process for either the auditioner (or the auditionee, especially when difficult choices have to be made).

However, we want our choirs to improve and need a way to evaluate singers, and the audition is one way to do that.

A more difficult question (and process) is whether a returning singer’s position in the choir is at risk in an audition?

For some time now—with the Choir of the West at Pacific Lutheran University, with Choral Arts, with the Seattle Symphony Chorale, and with Pro Coro Canada—I’ve had policies that a returning singer has to earn his or her spot at each re-audition. And I know I’ve occasionally had singers who simply wouldn’t audition because of that, even though they could certainly make it into the choir, a loss for both of us.

I understand the discomfort this engenders (in me, too), but without this possibility, choir membership can become stagnant (particularly in adult choirs—less of a problem in student choirs). And one also has to recognize that an individual singer’s skills, both vocally and musically, don’t stay the same. They can improve or decline. And in the case of a choir like Pro Coro, which is a professional choir of 24 voices (and we can’t increase the number of core singers for budgetary reasons even if, let’s say, I hear several outstanding new singers audition for a particular section), I’m responsible for the artistic quality of what we do—and must make decisions accordingly. Not easy!

Pro Coro has long had a policy of re-auditioning every year. With Choral Arts and the Seattle Symphony Chorale we did every other year (sops and tenors one year, altos and basses the next). I believe the Swedish Radio Choir does every third year (although every year after age 55, I believe), but that's unusual for a European professional choir, since most are unionized and once a singer gains tenure, it's very difficult to remove them.

More about the process in the next post.