<p>jP-</p>
<p>Here is my take, for what it is worth. Juilliard and other high level programs, like MSM (I am not going to get into the debate about which is better, etc, among the ‘high level programs’) have a name because like the Ivies, they a)Have been around a long time and b)have had successful students and c) tend to attract name faculty (who in my experience, may be name because they were a great performer). All of which has given them a face name (the irony is that MSM started as a community music program, and didn’t become a degree granting program until between 50 and 60 years go, I forget the exact year),so it might have less of a track record then some lesser named programs. </p>
<p>Juilliard and MSM have an even better edge then just that, in that NYC is an international cultural center, there is just so much music and dance going on there that a)it tends to attract both high level student and faculty and b)gets written about a lot because it is also in the center of the media that surrounds culture and arts. Because of that, Juilliard and MSM have an international reputation, that is burnished by the fact that Juilliard (and MSM) have had world class musicians come out from there. Violinists in China have heard of Juilliard, because of people like Itzak Perlman and Pinchas Zukerman and the like have come out of there, or to people who are in Korea that people like Kyung wha chung and Sarah Chang have gone there, and likewise on the Piano famous pianists have come out of there (and in the piano world, I am sure Lang Lang having gone to Curtis has given that a cachet). </p>
<p>Again, miles and miles of wordage have been written about the successful students coming out of Juilliard and MSM (and other programs, of course, at the same level), and that positive ink outweighs what is written about those who don’t make it, not much interest in those who fail I suppose. Want a prime example? Dorothy Delay had this incredible reputation as violin teacher, which came about when Itzak Perlman became her student, and hit the big time, then Pinchas Zuckerman hit it, and then came along Nigel Kennedy and Nadia Salerno-Soderbergh and Midori and Sarah Chang and a slew of others…but what that left out is the many multiples of that who never achieved more then moderate success, if any kind of success. Because of those successes, people wanted to get into Delay’s studio, and she literally had hundreds of kids in her studios at the college and pre college level…98% of whom probably never got far <em>shrug</em>. Juilliard and other high level programs are the same way, they have notable successes out there, but what people don’t see is the layers upon layers of failures that lie below that. </p>
<p>Likewise, there is the common (if mistaken) belief that somehow going to Juilliard or MSM or NEC, etc or Curtis, based on having gone there, will guarantee success in of itself, it is not uncommon, and that is the biggest misnomer. Yes, schools like that do have advantages, including being with top level students that can help drive a student forwards, and access to an incredible amount of culture and performing opportunities that may not be available in the scale it is there at other programs, but to equate that as ‘the only place to go’ is a misnomer, because there are a lot of factors weighing in on where to attend, and no place, NEC or FSU, can guarantee anything, other then an education and a diploma. This is true in the academic world, Ivy graduates often end up not achieving all that much, and kids from lesser known schools end up doing amazing things…And in music, when you are auditioning for artists representation, or to enter a competition, or for an orchestra job, having MSM or Juilliard or NEC on your resume might get you noticed in some cases, but in most it is simply a name on a CV, and what gets you the job or whatever is how you play. </p>
<p>Some of that belief, especially in recent times, I suspect is cultural, from people who come from countries where going to a name school does set your career path forwards, that if you don’t get into the top level school, you won’t be able to get into a high level career path, but that isn’t true with the music schools, any more then it is with having an ivy league education guaranteeing success. </p>
<p>Do Juilliard and MSM turn out high level music students? Yes. Do they offer unique opportunities to some or all of their students? Yes. Do they tend to attract high caliber students, at least in part because of the name? Yes. Do they guarantee success or even give that big an advantage? In my opinion, no, once you walk out those doors, it doesn’t give enough of a boost IMO to make it critical,that if you don’t go there you are screwed. </p>
<p>Schools like that offer networking, but if you look at the stats, if you look at how many of the kids from those schools end up going nowhere (someone mentioned an article about kids graduating from Juilliard profiled 20 years ago and how many of them end up outside music), you will see Juilliard, MSM, NEC et all are not the yellow brick road to success they are cracked up to be; they give advantages, but in the end don’t offer all that much more. Put it this way, I have run into “Juilliard trained musicians” teaching at local community music schools, and that isn’t all that rare, have seen that with graduates from a lot of places. </p>
<p>I also agree with the others, given the situation at hand, unless somehow your family situation allows forking over some significant portion of the 47k difference without having to go into debt or the poor farm, then it may not be a great idea to go to MSM, the additional benefits it provides at the UG level probably are not worth the debt load (just my opinion, of course). To come out of UG with a 350k debt load is staggering, even if that is in relatively low interest rate loans. Given that you may want to go to grad school (so paying back the loans will be deferred), getting a degree from MSM and then your masters is unlikely to produce a job right out of school that can swing that kind of loan, even Lang Lang didn’t start out making 6 figures, and want to know the numbers of musicians who come out making even 50k a year? It isn’t a lot, and even if you somehow came out and were making 50k, it wouldn’t be enough to pay back the loans and live almost anywhere. </p>
<p>And piano is even worse then other instruments, in many ways it is sink or swim. String instruments, percussion, winds and other instruments have the flexibility of doing chamber music, orchestral work, working the pits of professional theater and so forth, teaching, or some combination of the above, as well as opportunities to solo. </p>
<p>Piano basically has limited paths available, which makes ‘making it’ even more difficult then most, pianists either try to make it as soloists, they get work as accompanyists, they teach or in limited cases do chamber music (there are relatively few regular chamber groups with piano; there have been a number of piano trios, like the Beux Arts trio and Rubinstein/Piatagorsky/Heifetz, but they are a small fraction of a world dominated by string quartets and brass quartets and the like). This I really question having 350k in debt, on something that like all music, if not worse, is a crapshoot with the dice loaded against you on becoming a highly paid performer that could afford that. </p>
<p>And as others have pointed out, you could go to FSU, come out with a free ride, and then go to grad school at a ‘higher level program’, students do that all the time. Believe me, where you went to school gets trumped mighty fast out there in the world, once you get beyond the doors of the schools and are out there working, it is all about your ability, networking skills and how well you work out as a performer and/or colleague. If FSU offers a decent piano program, with a teacher that can push you, and do so debt free, then concentrate on preparing for a high level masters program, which can polish your abilities, and in the end you probably will come out financially a lot better off (when people mentioned the word TA or GA, they are talking about teaching assistant or grad assistant. Grad programs as part of getting a masters degree, often in return for a full or partial scholarship plus potentially stipends, have grad students teach UG courses or acting as teaching assistant to other teachers, so grad school can financially cost less then they otherwise would (I am not familiar with grad programs in music, what I talk about is common in academic programs, especially those leading to a pHD, for full time grad students, I assume it is true in music).</p>
<p>In the end what this boils down to I think is weighing the pros of going to a high level program (that will put a big financial bite on you), looking at the advantages versus going into bankruptcy, then looking at alternates and asking would the program give a good enough education to allow you to get into a good grad program, and weighing that all up.</p>
<p>One thing I have learned in the world of music is that the conventional wisdom about anything often has significant caveats to them, if not outright falsehoods. There are people, for example, that believe that in the audition process for high level programs, that the person who scores best on an audition will get in; there are people who believe that getting into a name school will guarantee success, that out in the field all that matters is how well someone performs technically (big one in the violin world), that if you work with a great teacher and win competitions your future is set, all of them missing huge chunks of reality in them (plenty of people who have won high level competitions end up doing relatively little). </p>
<p>Think about this, in the end, among people highly skilled/trained, is that ‘making it’ often seems to come down to serendipity about who is successful and who isn’t. Are you willing to bet a 350k debt load on that, that at some point you will be able to afford to pay for that loan, and know that even if you do make it, that point will probably happen a ways down the road after finishing school, and in the meantime you will be struggling to figure out how to pay it. That has to be weighed up, and frankly, I think betting that a ‘great program’ will make it easy to pay that kind of debt is like playing Russian Roulette with 4 bullets in the chamber, the odds are about the same IME. </p>
<p>I wish you luck, and understand that the people on this board in many cases know the reality of the music world, some of them are musicians themselves, others have children working through the process, others have contact with the ‘real’ world of music, not the fantasy version. Conventional wisdom, like you ‘absolutely have to go to a name school to make it big’ is based for the most part on the beliefs of people who have not been around music, who have seen a Lang Lang or Perlman or Midori or Chang, seen the headlines and the glowing articles, seen where they went, and put two and two together to make four, when the answer is really 5. In the end the decision is going to be yours, but I strongly recommend you start reading threads on here, and also read books about the music world, and articles in music magazines (many of these are on the net), real world accounts of musicians, including those who have made it, about the realities of life in music, before making a decision. I can understand your dream of going into music, I wouldn’t be supporting my son in his dreams, that at this level has already cost a lot of money and support on our part, if I didn’t, but you need to be realistic, too. One thing I have learned, no matter how good you think you are, no matter how much you love the music, there are kids as good or better out there, and piano is an especially competitive world. Put it this way, people going to med school can come out with 200k in debt, but if they graduate and become an MD, they face realistic chances of having a profession that can pay off that debt and have a comfortable living; you can get a PHd in piano performance from Juilliard, have that kind of debt, and face years of jobs paying very little. </p>
<p>The other nice part about studying at FSU is that you have options there you don’t at a conservatory, if the passion dies (which sometimes it does), you are in a decent school and could switch to something else, which isn’t easy at a conservatory, especially if you have already thrown a year or two tuition (worse, borowed money) out the window, at FSU you could potentially keep on with a full scholarship, and maybe turn pre med or something else, and not lose all that much. And if you still have the passion after 4 years for piano, you can pursue it at a higher level knowing you want to do this, and also without having a ton of debt on your back, or parents financially wiped out…</p>