Juilliard

College Majors Music Major
21

<p>Mystery99, I don’t agree or disagree with you about Juilliard. It is fine with me if you want to criticize Juilliard here. I disagree with your attacking Juilliard on the basis of your arguing that a particular past student or a particular teacher there have performances on youtube that you judge to be below the expected quality of people affiliated with Juilliard. Even if your cricitisms of those particular people have merit, it did not come across as compelling evidence of Juilliard’s being overrated as it did an attack on individual people and possibly a criticism of an institutional value/policy at Juilliard of wanting students included from underrepresented groups. </p>

<p>I think the best place to criticize youtube videos is on youtube itself. </p>

<p>A strange analogy came to mind while I was writing this. Just wondering if all the jokes about the intelligence/communication skills of a recent president who was a Yale alum damaged the reputation of Yale in a major way. I don’t think so. So aside from it seeming unfair to berate these two people as a way to show that Juilliard is not what it’s reputation suggests, I doubt what Mystery99 posted would result in any significant change in readers’ opinions about Juilliard. That is all I have to say and will not post anything else about this.</p>

22

<p>“Even if your cricitisms of those particular people have merit, it did not come across as compelling evidence of Juilliard’s being overrated as it did an attack on individual people and possibly a criticism of an institutional value/policy at Juilliard of wanting students included from underrepresented groups.”</p>

<p>Sure it does, I was pointing out that those two players who are affiliated with the school play at an UNprofessional level.</p>

23

<p>Mystery99, just to clarify, YOU brought up idea that Juilliard might have shown preference for students on the basis of ethnicity. You wrote:</p>

<p>"Talent is not the only component in being admitted to Juilliard. Political connections, your wealth (or lack …</p>

24

<p>Mystery99, for what it matters, I appreciate your courage in sharing your opinion and perspective. If the take-away from your message is that factors beyond talent are considered in whether to admit students at Juilliard (and every other school), then I agree. I cannot speak to the veracity of the arguments you chose to illustrate your point, but then I don’t think it is my job to judge them. Much like a tv where I can change the channel if I don’t like what is on, I can read past your post and go on to the next. And while I’m at it, I didn’t sense any ‘sour grapes’ in your posts. Thanks for keeping the board interesting.</p>

25

<p>As anyone who has been on this board will tell you I am not someone who looks at music schools or Juilliard in particular with rose colored glasses, I know that the process is not totally “fair and equitable”, that students can get admitted for a number of factors that might seem unfair (like through networking, where a kid gets in because a teacher holds out a slot for them). And yes, I wouldn’t be surprised if some kids got in over others because of being under represented. For example, if you look at the admissions stats for Juilliard, they have more women applying then men, but they seem to keep the admissions to 50-50…which means there could be a disadvantage for female applicants (I said could be, because I don’t know how well anyone played). </p>

<p>Through having seen student performers at Juilliard a lot, and having seen in particular the chamber music and the orchestra programs perform, if your claim was true, that the school is second rate, then what I have seen makes no sense. The Juilliard orchestra in particular is one of the finest performing groups in this country, it is routinely reviewed by the NY Times and in general the critics have said it often ranks up there with some of the top pro orchestras. I have also seen the orchestras from a number of other music schools, and while they are fine groups,the Juilliard orchestra is as good or better then many of them (and that is my opinion, of course). I have seen student performances at Curtis, routinely ranked as one of the top music schools around, and quite frankly I don’t see all that much difference between the students there or Juilliard for the most part (in fact I have seen students at Curtis I wonder how they got in, but that is not for this thread).</p>

<p>I also finda bit strange your use of a Juilliard Teacher’s performance as proof the place is mediocre. The teacher in question has been teaching at Juilliard for 45 years +,and if you look at the people he has taught in either chamber music or on violin, it is a murderers row including people of the caliber of Kyung Wha chung, Pinchas Zuckerman, Yo Yo Ma in Chamber and a number of top orchestra musicians…I also will add that I don’t know when that video was done, but (x) is not a young man, he is somewhere near 70, and the reality is that skills decline over time. The other factor is even assuming that (x) wasn’t the greatest of performers it is pretty well known that a lot of great teachers were not great performers (I have heard Galamian wasn’t a great performer, but his teaching is part of legend), and Delay was not a great performer either in her day. (There is also the obverse, great performers often make crappy teachers). I also have heard some of (x)'s students play, and you can’t fake the kind of talent they have. BTW, the (x) video you are using is also not exactly fair, it is a lecture on the Chaconne, where he is focusing on talking about the piece, he is playing excerpts, not the whole piece,and it was recorded on a hand held video camera, not the greatest sound. When people do lectures, they aren’t focusing on the performance, they are focusing on the music, it is quite different from a performance, among other things he probably didn’t spend hours on hours practicing it as someone would during a performance. </p>

<p>I will add that if you are going to use top soloists, I mean the ones at the top of their game in the solo instruments, I would point out that in the last 20 years none of the US top music schools has turned out a lot of soloists. Hillary Hahn went to Curtis, and on a slighly older generation, Joshua Bell went to Indiana, Lang Lang went to Curtis as well, but if you look at the rest of the ‘class of young, top soloists’ most are coming from the European conservatories from what I can tell (and that is definitely true on the violin). It doesn’t mean that US schools aren’t good, it simply means that for whatever reasons the soloists are coming from europe, as they often have.</p>

<p>I also think that it may be a bit unfair to use the video of the ex student you did to prove a point. First of all, that is only one student. More importantly, the person you are so claiming shouldn’t have been in there a)is doing jazz, which is a different world then classical (to its credit Jazz cares a lot more about the performance and connecting with an audience, and isn’t as technically obsessed) and b)is not a native violin player, his training was on the viola (he has a BM from Juilliard, and an MM from Yale on viola in both cases, so does that make Yale corrupt as well…and you are comparing a student trying to get in on violin to one who got in on viola,different programs and audition panels). Using one student, who may or may not be a great violinist, is using one student to prove a rule, that is like saying because a family member is a drunk, the rest of the family are a bunch of losers. </p>

<p>And in all fairness, besides the weakness of the You Tube videos you tried to post, you never let us judge the people you thought should have gotten in. If you want to make the point that those people were good enough to get in, then tell us where we can find videos of them performing. Besides the flaws above, the kids you are talking about could have flaws that would have kept them out of Juilliard, they could have been technically brilliant but lacking musicality, they could have had some sort of attitude that came across badly in the audition process, it could have been anything. Unfortunately, we have only your word on it and since we don’t know who you are we have no way of judging the real facts in the matter you are posting. </p>

<p>I am not unsympathetic to what you are saying, I think it is important that people on here realize that Juilliard is not the be all or end all, that it isn’t perfect, the audition process there or anywhere else is not scientific and has biases and structural inequities, but I also don’t think it is fair for someone to call it mediocre with nothing to back it up, or to claim other schools are better in this regards. If Juilliard is truly mediocre, that it is accepting mediocrities over more talented students, then I would be happy for kids who didn’t get in there but got in other ‘better’ schools,since it would give them better opportunities, no? Not getting into Juilliard is not the end of the world, and in many cases it might not be a fit (for any number of reasons, maybe not finding a teacher who fit, the cost, finding a program more suited to a players style all come to mind), and a talented student can find many paths that do work; but that doesn’t mean Juilliard is a sham, it means it is a good/great music school that doesn’t work for everyone. </p>

<p>The other observation I have, from some of the other parents on this board, and music students I have gotten to know, is that the admissions process is serendipity. I have seen kids not get accepted at Juilliard, but make it into Curtis; I have seen kids make it into the Juilliard/CIM/NEC level of school, and get rejected from what are usually considered second tier schools. Yes, parents have to go into this with their eyes open, and realize that it is a crazy world out there, that the criteria they think applies might not, that as good as their kid is that others may be better, or may have access to a teacher’s studio and in the end they don’t. Even orchestra auditions are not necessarily all that fair from what I have learned, despite the screen audition there may be biases in that process as well, maybe a bias against a certain style of playing, or even the sound of the applicant’s instrument might hurt them, among other things I have heard. Parents and students have to realize that they are going to deal with things like that, that if they want to pursue this path it is both rough and in many cases, a school of hard knocks, but if they want to go into music they have to pick themselves up and move on. As much as I would wish it to be easier or fairer, it isn’t, and with my son we have learned to accept things and do the best we can to make it work. We heard of someone who didn’t get accepted at Juilliard but made it into the NEC/Harvard joint program, I leave it to others to say what that means.</p>

26

<p>We were told (in the parent meeting at Juilliard) that it is not just wonderful talent that the admissions department looks at when considerng a certain student. Of course that is extremely important but they look further to see if there is potential in musical and personal growth. They look at the recommendation that is required. Is the perspective student one who displays a teachable attidude, and does the student get along well with others, and much much more. </p>

<p>I came away quite impressed with the school. I personally felt that all the conservatories were similar in that department. </p>

<p>It is my opinion that when people single out a particular school, work place, etc. with strong complaints it is because they want to “get back” at them for being rejected. This is so hurtful and damaging.</p>

27

<p>The content of this thread is inappropriate and unnecessary. We all know that admissions are not completely “fair.” There is no reason to make a thread berating one school’s alleged admissions procedures based on conjecture of one person. The bottom line is that students just need to try their hardest; it’s hard work that has the greatest results in the end anyway.</p>

28

<p>An anecdote (or two) is not the basis for an argument of the sort attempted in this thread. My son got into Juilliard without any connections whatsoever; we live in Podunk and no one on the auditioning panel had ever even heard of either his teacher or him prior to the audition. A very well-connected friend of his that plays as well or better than he was rejected (possibly a poor audition). However, I do not think that my son’s admission or his friend’s rejection means that connections are irrelevant; his is just one case and his friend’s a second case. As many others have mentioned, connections are probably a factor in all music schools. Indeed, connections are a factor in almost any human endeavour, even in mathematics which in many people’s minds is as objective and as far removed as possible from music! </p>

<p>I am sure that most of the better music schools have rejected people who have gone on to have big careers. Wow, if Juilliard only missed admitting one person that went on to winning a major competition, then it is doing very well. Some of the schools are quite straightforward about the fact that very weak academics can be a dealbreaker: if you can’t cut it in the classroom, then it doesn’t matter what you are doing in the studio. A lack of proficiency in the English language can also prevent admission despite a stellar audition and incredible talent.</p>

<p>As musicprnt points out, Juilliard students, on the whole, play very, very well. I am more inclined to believe that a school’s quality is better represented by repeatedly excellent orchestral performance that involve large numbers of students than it is by a couple of isolated youtube videos.</p>

<p>Juilliard is not for everyone (and, of course, no music school is). Its reputation is probably somewhat bigger than deserved: everyone has heard of Juilliard and everyone is impressed if they hear that your child made it in to Juilliard. Many other schools that have programs that are of comparable quality to Juilliards’ are not household names. </p>

<p>I do wonder if the low admission rate at Juilliard is at least partially due to its fame: it receives several times the number of applications of most other music schools, possibly merely because everyone, including untalented bimbos, has heard of Juilliard. As well, Juilliard’s enviable endowment allows it to offer financial offers that are often difficult to refuse; hence, Juilliard does not have to admit as large a percentage of applicants in order to obtain its desired yield. Poor schools have to admit several times the number of students they want in their freshman class because they know that the majority will turn down the poor schools’ offers.</p>

<p>I am certain that we could find a couple of recordings of graduates or faculty of other music schools that would not be entirely flattering to the school (and I am not suggesting anything about the quality of the youtube videos discussed here: I have not listened to them and I do not intend to). If recordings of all of this year’s auditions were available along with their admit/reject status, then I might bother to listen. One needs a large body of evidence in order to make the sort of evaluations that the OP made. </p>

<p>A single home-made video of excerpts played during the course of a masterclass is rather flimsy evidence of a violinist’s skill. I would suggest that one listen to some of this violinist’s recordings with Columbia, Sony and other major labels over the course of his career before judging his skill level. Most of us would be out of work if we were judged on the basis of our worst moments. Again, one or two isolated incidents do not form a sufficient body of evidence on which to judge a school in which thousands of auditions are heard annually and in which hundreds of students are enrolled annually.</p>

29

<p>Excellent post, violindad.</p>

30

<p>Disappointed people have a tendency to make comparisons and relative evaluations using lowest common denominators (LCD). The OP here does the same. Doing so ignores the reality already stated, that top schools generally get it right when it comes to evaluations and admissions. Do they miss on some future talent? Unquestionably they do. And that can be because a weak audition caused a rejection, an unusually strong audition caused an acceptance, or any one of those grey area factors tipped the scales ever so slightly toward one applicant over another.</p>

<p>On the use of LCD’s for comparison, I’ve dealt with this as a sports coach for years. And what the OP did in posting two videos (which I agree did not present the performers in the best light) was use those rare instances of shaky performance to indict an entire decision making process. </p>

<p>In sports, let’s take basketball as an example. The weakest player on the team is unhappy with her playing time, so her parents decide to complain: Julie shoots it better than Jamie, she’s a better dribbler that Sandy, she’s a better defender than Maggie, and a better passer than Betty. Sounds like a good player, right? Well, Julie is in reality the second weakest player at all of those skills which makes her the weakest player on the team because she does nothing very well. Complainers love LCD arguments because they can isolate seemingly meaningful issues and attempt to make their single comparison a basis to indict an entire system. That’s a little like what happened here.</p>

<p>It’s already been said that many of us do adhere to the view that everything in this business is not 100% ability based and audition driven. Anyone who understands music, arts, and performance already knows that. That such shortcomings creep into the admissions process is not only unsurprising, it’s good preparation for the future performer and family/friends.</p>

31

<p>Speihei–AWESOME analysis. You’ve given me a new tool!</p>

<p>As delicious as it may be for some to vent about a top school, critique Youtube videos, and feel superior for being able to do this–
I’m sure we could come up with likewise criticisms of every place that we haven’t had a good experience with. Time to move on!</p>

32

<p>Violindad:</p>

<p>Nice post, I think it brought things to the crux of the matter about Juilliard and the music schools in general. </p>

<p>One of your comments I think is right on the money:</p>

<p>“I do wonder if the low admission rate at Juilliard is at least partially due to its fame: it receives several times the number of applications of most other music schools, possibly merely because everyone, including untalented bimbos, has heard of Juilliard.”</p>

<p>That is the crux of the matter, from what I can tell it does get a lot more applications then other places. From what I know, the admin rate in the pre college is even less then the college (at least in strings and piano), and the numbers are staggering, for 10 slots you often have 140-150 people applying. Juilliard has an almost mythical brand (deserved or not), and to many people, especially in foreign countries, they really believe that if you get into Juilliard you automatically are going to be successful, so they get a huge number of people applying.</p>

<p>One other thing I will add, and that is that even if kids get in through “connections”, that schools still have standards that need to be met or they won’t even consider you, and for schools like Juilliard, NEC, Curtis, et al, these are not mediocre. Yeah, occassionally I am sure someone who seems or is mediocre gets in, but keep in mind admissions standards are relative. The pre screen has a certain level, that if the applicant doesn’t score above a certain level, they won’t even be auditioned; then on the audition process, they apparently establish a benchmark level, and auditioners who didn’t reach that are not even considered (And I would hazard a guess that even if a teacher wants a certain student, they would be reluctant to try and get someone who didn’t meet this level in). So when we talk about one kid getting in and another not, that even if the one who didn’t get in was technically better, the kid getting in is probably going to be pretty accomplished, if not as much as the one who didn’t get in IME. </p>

<p>“As well, Juilliard’s enviable endowment allows it to offer financial offers that are often difficult to refuse; hence, Juilliard does not have to admit as large a percentage of applicants in order to obtain its desired yield.”</p>

<p>That is interesting, from what I have heard Juilliard is not known for generous financial aid or merit scholarships, at least from what I hear from those who applied and got in (and please don’t take that as gospel, that is simply what I have heard from people we know whose kids got in, which represents a very small percentage of kids who get in). My take is kind of that they don’t need to offer much in aid, because they have so many people applying, and they have such a name, that many kids are willing to hock their future to be able to go there, or stretch family finances (again, just my opinion, no way to know the reality). I also suspect that if they have been in the past, they may not for the near future, because like many schools, their endowment took a major nosedive with the current financial mess.</p>

33

<p>At an information session I attended for Juilliard, the admissions officer stated, in response to the merit aid question: “We don’t give it; if you got accepted, we assume you have merit. We give need based aid.”</p>

34

<p>" Disappointed people have a tendency to make comparisons and relative evaluations using lowest common denominators (LCD). The OP here does the same. Doing so ignores the reality already stated, that top schools generally get it right when it comes to evaluations and admissions."</p>

<p>So Spihei, you are calling a faculty and a full scholarship student LCD? Go to (y)'s Youtube channel and watch a few of those videos and ask yourselves if you think a caucasian applicant at (y’s)'s playing level would be admitted. I think in this case obviously, and in other such admissions decisions at Juilliard, you have the admissions committee showing racial prejudice and making decisions about someone’s fate on issues having absolutely nothing to do with the actual audition or playing level of the candidate. This is flat out criminal. I simply cannot believe (y) performed a better audition than everyone who tried out. If you have professional experience like myself, and credentials, when reviewing his performances you will nod in agreement with my argument.</p>

<p>As far as (x) goes, I stand by everything I said, he plays out of tune, doesn’t play in time, and has many basic technical flaws. He is a politician and an administrator, but he is not a violinist!. </p>

<p>He is someone who doesn’t threaten his colleagues (often times people feel threatened in academia by brilliant people that might outshine them - you won’t find Kavakos, or a Frank Peter Zimmerman joining the faculty there anytime soon guaranteed). </p>

<p>I asked you all the question if some violinist tried out and played like (x) at the audition, if you think s/he would get in. I posed this question, because I feel a kind of double standard here. You have a guy on the faculty who clearly cannot cut it on the concert stage who is judging your sons and daughters at auditions. Instead some of you have resorted to attack my personality, and my credibility which is off base. One person even said it is not important for a teacher to be a good player. See that is where I think you are absolutely wrong and find a place like Curtis - where the faculty can play at a professional level, a much more appealing school.</p>

<p>Someone earlier said (x) taught Zukerman and Kyung Wha Chung - that is absolutely untrue! He is someone who for lack of performance credentials in his biography uses other people’s names in his biography to make himself look better. It is called name dropping. He might’ve coached them in chamber music, but he was never their teacher, Ivan Galamian was!</p>

<p>I simply don’t believe the stories that students get into Juilliard ‘cold’ without a connection. These are just parents trying to protect the Juilliard name. Usually most students at Juilliard study at Aspen, Bowdoin, Meadowmount, and other such camps before college, spending thousands of dollars of their parents’ money, and at the same time fattening these teachers’ wallets. Of course the teachers are going to give preference to the student who studied with him at Aspen over the outsider with no connection. Also there are certain teachers who are known as feeders (usually Juilliard graduates) who call up their friends on the jury and ask them to take their students into the program.</p>

<p>Juilliard is a business, it is not a meritocracy.</p>

35

<p>mystery99: You have me laughing: you write that you “simply don’t believe the stories that students get into Juilliard ‘cold’ without a connection. These are just parents trying to protect the Juilliard name.” </p>

<p>I assure you that neither my son nor his teacher has any Juilliard connection whatsoever. My son has never been to any summer program in the US. While he has encountered faculty from the US at other summer programs, none of these teachers teaches at Juilliard. </p>

<p>I have known others that have gotten in “cold.” I am sure there are dozens and dozens every year that get in “cold.”</p>

<p>I have no motive whatsoever for trying “to protect the Juilliard name” and I think that if you read my post carefully you could see that I did not try to protect the name.</p>

<p>You can certainly choose to believe what you want, but in choosing to so quickly and decisively disbelieve certain things, you ultimately close off your world. I too am skeptical of many claims, but I rarely am able to state categorically that I disbelieve someone’s story. I often doubt, but I rarely “simply don’t believe.”</p>

36

<p>Take notice everyone how my posts have been edited. Censorship perhaps? Obviously someone from Jailyard is reading and complaining about me using incompetent Jailyard faculty member and student names. The videos I posted yesterday were to validate my point how they are second rate and not a worldclass institution both in the faculty and student body. They know I’m right, too. Juilliard is a big business, with a name to protect - kind of like Scientology. They will go to great lengths to protect it.</p>

37

<p>Thank you to the parents and student members who continue to self-police this forum. It is among the best subfora on CC in terms of quality of conversation. Normally we see new members enter and welcome their contributions.</p>

<p>It is incumbent on all members (new ones, too) to READ the checkbox as they create their account, that says they will post in accordance to Terms of Service. These are viewable, and reviewable, under FAQ (see blue band on top of each page). </p>

<p>There it says clearly that NO LINKS to Youtube are permitted. That should be enough.</p>

<p>Further, this particular thread gives testimony (not that we needed any) why we do not permit links to YouTube. </p>

<p>You or I could put up a youtube of you or me at any part of any day, doing our work. That is not appropriate fodder for public critique of our professional work. Not in a million years.</p>

<p>Further, if you wish to engage in performance reviews of professors, use a different site such as RateMyProfessors.com</p>

<p>Do you not think we could have a field day here with every school forum discussing the pros and cons of Professor X’s Lecture on Egyptian Scarabs (link to post on Youtube) as evidence that the school is not all it says it is? And how about the fellow who just graduated from there…here’s a Youtube of him with some random excerpt of him giving a best man toast at a wedding. You call HIM a public speaker? Etc. Etc.</p>

<p>The courteous new member reads to get the feeling for the overall purpose of a forum, follows the rules agreed to when making an account.</p>

<p>There is ample room within the rules of CC to engage in discussion about school’s strengths and weaknesses without zeroing in on any single student or professor. Highly inappropriate use of this forum.</p>

<p>While reading those Terms of Service, also take note that we ask people not to post personally identifying information about themselves (real names and so on). How much moreso to pick someone out and tear them apart professionally without their engagement and agreement. </p>

<p>Discussions about race and admissions are frequent across CC. These are amply discussed on threads called “Race and Admission” to give outlet to the questions about Affirmative Action. </p>

<p>In addition, we are fierce on rooting out racist insults and slurs, along with gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation… Noting: None of these appeared on this thread, although race was mentioned. It is possible and productive to discuss race, and we recognize that is different from lodging racist comments. That set of concerns (racism, sexism, disability…) is also mentioned with top billing on our Terms of Service.</p>

<p>On this thread, the 2 problems causing edits were: </p>

<p>Links to Youtube
Personally Identifying Information (names)</p>

<p>Without these, it is possible to continue to discuss and make points about opinions on any school including Julliard.</p>

<p>Readers, please continue to report any questionable posts to the Moderators. We are all over these fora every day and count on the members to bring our attention to threads where posts might be outside of TOS. When we find so (as I did above) we take action (see edit notes above) if warranted.</p>

<p>Moderator Paying3Tuitions</p>

38

<p>Mystery99. No one is censoring you. Feel free to start your own blog and write whatever the heck you want. I’m sure Joseph Polisi has better things to do than call up Google to have your blog taken down.</p>

39

<p>

</p>

<p>NO sir. Your posts were edited by the Moderators of College Confidential, of which I am one of a team. We moderate all posts acc to Terms of Service. </p>

<p>Your post above violates yet another TOS:
Do not discuss moderation publicly on forum.</p>

<p>Why? Not for the joy of censorship. Discussing moderation publicly is like having people talking to firefighters when they are trying to put out a fire. Very distracting and we cannot do our work trying to explain ourselves as we do it.</p>

<p>This has nothing to do with Julliard personnel. Step back and look at the size of this entire website, hundreds of schools are featured with thousands of posts daily to monitor. </p>

<p>You were edited because you violated Terms of Service here. Even after they were brought to your attention, you continued.</p>

<p>Right now I am going to enjoy a bit of this fine day with my daughter, visiting home. Meanwhile, I am timing you out for a day so that you will use that time to read Terms of Service rather than continue to to post here. When you return, follow TOS.</p>

40

<p>Samuel Beckett’s “No Exit” was rejected by every other publisher in NY before being accepted by New Directions which was then a practically unknown publisher. I’ve seen the rejection letters. </p>

<p>This is the life of the artist. I think my kid understands this.</p>