Juilliard

College Majors Music Major
41

<p>Stringfollies:</p>

<p>I think anyone who gets involved in a serious way with any art understands that, or for that matter with anything (anyone working around corporate america will regale you with stories of incompetent people who got promoted over someone better, etc). Ask anyone who has broken a sweat to get up to speed for an audition, and then sees who won the audition and says “Why?”, arts have no real objective standards, they are subjective. My S just went into a competition,the type where you get comments, and he was kind of taken aback when one of the judges ripped him on certain things, while the other two judges praised him in those same areas <em>shrug</em>. It happens, and yeah, sometimes it can come down to ‘bias’, it can come down to a judge didn’t like someone’s perceived attitude, someone didn’t like what school they attend, it is all out there.</p>

<p>What disturbs me about the OP in this case is the unwillingness to read what people were posting and reflect. I have been in that position myself, where I have posted stuff on here that others felt was unfair or untrue, and even if I didn’t fully agree, I also listened to what they had to say. Others posted a lot of great information about Juilliard and the other music schools, many said they knew admissions was not always ‘fair’, others like myself pointed out that the examples used may have been either unfair or not representative of a whole large program even if the claims were true. </p>

<p>I did get a chuckle out of being accused, along with others, of ‘protecting Juilliard’ since I generally am one of those who tends to look at things in music, including the big J, with a jaundiced eye <em>lol</em>. The basic answer is things are what they are and whatever their flaws are, the music schools also have unbelievable students and some really great teachers and programs to boot, and to throw that out because the process isn’t always so fair, well, kind of ridiculous, since nothing I have seen is perfect:)</p>

42

<p>It’s time for the general public to realize there are numerous highly respected music conservatories and schools of music. Better publicity, please!</p>

43

<p>

</p>

<p>musicprnt, you may want to have that looked at. Don’t let it go too long.</p>

<p>In the event you can’t afford the medical care due to the high cost of instruments, private instruction, summer immersion programs and audition/school visit airfare and saving for tuition, there is excellent free medical advice in the Parent’s Cafe. </p>

<p>:D</p>

44

<p>Silly me - “No Exit” is Sartre. The play I was talking about by Beckett was “Waiting for Godot”!</p>

45

<p>As someone who has worked in Human Resources, I just want to say that even given the lack of factors such as connections, politics, etc, EVERY admissions/hiring process is subjective. During my time in that department I did 2-3 interview sessions every week with colleagues from different departments, and I have to say people tend to pick people whose personalities or abilities or life stories resonate with their own experiences. You may be applying to an institution, but in the end decisions are made by specific people whose perceptions are always colored by their own preferences in people. So one person may prefer to hire staff who are very independent and would speak up, while others might think such people are too aggressive and inappropriate. The same subjectivity is at work in music; one person says my vibrato is well-formed, the other says it is far too slow. Well.</p>

<p>In any case, I think in some ways the admissions process in the US is already relatively transparent in that many people do get in “cold”. I looked closely at Germany while deciding where to go, and I was told by so many people that you essentially have to have come to an “agreement” with a teacher before you audition. The preference is that you travel to the school and have at least one lesson, if not a series of them, with the teacher some time before your actual audition time, and the teacher is supposed to give you an “indication” based on this of whether you would be taken into his studio or not. The audition appears to be by and large a formality (other posters, this is what I have been told more than once by different people, but feel free to correct me if you have personal experience with the process). The impression I get in Germany is that they virtually don’t expect anyone to apply “cold”. At first this came as a bit of a shock, but then as I kept thinking about it I began thinking that if you had the resources or were from Germany (which is really pretty small,so I imagine travel costs are not prohibitive generally), this could be a better method of matching teacher and student than a 5-10 minute audition. This way, you both know what you’re getting into for the next few years. On the other hand, of course, it tends to keep out those who aren’t already quite connected to the network one way or another.</p>

<p>For that matter, I played for 4 different people in Germany on a short trip there last year, and I was told by the first one to come, told by the second one that it would be difficult but I should try, told by the third one to give up because he didn’t believe people could develop advanced performance skills so late and that people learn string instruments really from age 14-17, and told by the last one that my playing was fine but “as you know, in Germany age is a problem”. 3 of the 4 are teaching in the same institution. I think this alone is a good illustration of the sort of subjectivity that is always at work in any selection process involving human judgment. In the end it boils down to both what is culturally acceptable in your country as well as your own preferences with regard to human personalities.</p>

46

<p>Bratsche: the German admission process that you describe resembles admissions to many non-music PhD programs that I am familiar with: there is often a significant amount of talk and correspondence between hopeful student and potential thesis supervisor well before any actual application, particularly in the humanities and social sciences. Both the student and supervisor want to know if they can work with each other.</p>

<p>Thanks for sharing those insights into another culture’s music schools.</p>

47

<p>Actually, in most cases students in the US apply to grad school in the humanities visiting if at all, after admission, and with no prior direct contact with any professors. That was certainly true in the experience of the recent (successful) applicants to grad school I know. As to selecting a dissertation director, dissertations are usually written after several years, so it would be premature to really discuss them with any certainty; it isn’t unusual to change focus after/during course work. It’s quite different in England, where the PhD programs are shorter in duration and involve pretty much writing a dissertation and minimal course work or exams (because undergraduate studies are so focused). This is off-topic…except to the extent that there may be some politics involved in grad school admissions too…and subjectivity.</p>

48

<p>“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 explained in the information session for parents, the audition process at Juilliard is as follows - teachers sign up to attend an audition session. Teachers are not allowed to talk to each other during the audition about the candidate. They have next to no information on each candidate they are listening to in that session. In particular they do not know which teachers they have studied with, nor who the candidates’ preferred teachers are. Each of them will give a score after listening to the audition, and indicate whether he or she would be prepared to teach the student. the score cards are then collected by the administration for sorting out the top scorers for admission. Even if a student knows one teacher, he cannot expect the other 8 or 9 teachers (as the case may be) to give them scores on the higher level to enable them to compete with an advantage over others. Moreover, Juilliard faculty members are perhaps notoriously not so “collegiate”, which makes it rather unlikely that any particular teacher would be able to influence the scoring by other teachers (and it will have to be several teachers in order to make it work for the candidate!) ahead of the audition.</p>

<p>Mystery99, can you enlighten the readers on (1) how exactly you believe “politicians” are in a position to influence the audition outcome, bearing in mind the audition process, as described above, is far less likely to lend itself to manipulation by individual faculty member than in other top schools? (2) why any teacher desiring fame and power for himself or herself would try to manipulate audition results so that less qualified students who may not otherwise impress the audition panel to get admitted on his own steam should get admitted to study in his/her studio? What good is it perceived to do to the teacher? Do you think it’s because the Juilliard professor needs more students, even mediocre or bad ones, to fill his or her studio and pay him or her more fees?</p>

<p>I have, however, heard that in the past there was a highly reputable and influential teacher who used to get her way in the administration by making sure that her students get full financial aid over students of other less influential teachers. I would not call that fair either, but that’s life. Are you seriously suggesting that any particular faculty member has that kind of power over the adminstration even on questions of admission?</p>

<p>I echo the comments of Musicprnt. Since you rely on your alleged “professional” “credentials” to attack other professionals personally and belittle the comments of other readers, don’t you think it is only fair that you come out from the dark and give your true name and “credentials”?</p>

49

<p>Has anyone on this forum read the book “The Price of Admission” by Daniel Golden? He is a pulitzer prize winning reporter for the NY Times. The book uncovers the amount to which many universities/colleges factor in legacy/athletics/fame/money into the admission process. Its a very fascinating read.</p>

<p>If I believe half of what he writes (and I happen to believe most of it); then I have to believe that ALL kinds of things are factored into admissions at both Conservatories and traditional Colleges. Unfortunately in this country, college admission is not necessarily based on merit.</p>

<p>That being said…I do believe that the “best” applicants are much less affected. I think it is more the middle of the road student who gets shunned in favor of a legacy/political/or rich applicant. </p>

<p>Read the book!</p>

50

<p>My son went the summer before his senior year to Interlochen, never attended any other summer program. He was accepted at IU, NEC, CIM, Juilliard, with considerable scholarships everywhere but Juilliard. He has never studied with a big name teacher, just young very dedicated teachers. We have only his youth orchestra director as a connection; he is not a professional player. We did take a spring break trip and he had lessons at 2 of the 4 places. I’m sure it depends on your instrument and your talent, but we are one of the “get in cold” persons that some believe don’t exist.</p>

51

<p>Sounds like a pretty accurate book flute1298. I know people in admissions at a certain prestigious university where they put a special colored sticker on applications of people whose parents attended or donated to the school. These applications are then put in a separate pile from the rest. I’m not making this up!</p>

<p>At Juilliard and other schools these factors do come into play. There are big industrialists from the orient who send their kids to Juilliard and other music schools in the US that make tremendous donations to the endowments at these schools. Think about the cost of sending your children overseas to study, it is tremendous. Only the elite ruling class can do this really. I remember at another famous music school I actually was introduced to a CEO of a major company from Asia. He was a large benefactor to the school. A few relatives of his attended the school. Now would it be wrong to hypothetically show a preference to his relative’s applications after a large donation? This will go against everything I have said earlier, but my answer to that is: probably not.</p>

<p>Muimui, I did read through your entire post. I do not have time to answer every question one by one. I don’t know you at all, but you did I think raise a few interesting points. You have obviously attended some admissions coffee meetings with power point presentations held by some of the assistants to the admissions people, but, I am afraid you have not a clue (if I may be so blunt) what goes on in the audition room. Unless you have sat on the Juilliard panel, or taken the audition (which I do not believe you have done either of -correct me if I’m wrong), I don’t think you have any business telling me or others how the Juilliard audition works. </p>

<p>The numeric scoring system you brought up is simply a red herring and a cover for the faculty to tell a student when s/he gets turned down that s/he did not get a high enough score from the ‘democratic’ voting system in place. It is actually almost a brilliant lie. </p>

<p>If Ms. DeLay, Mr. Galamian, Mr. Smirnoff, Mr. Lowenthal, Mr. Appel, Mr. Rhodes etc. wants a student in, s/he gets in. Of course the jury in most cases knows who the applicant studies with, it is very transparent. Back about ten years ago, I got a kick out of how the application form said something like ‘teacher preference will not be shared with faculty members but only with the Dean and admissions office’, however in the case of violin students, the former Dean was on the violin faculty, so that wasn’t entirely true. </p>

<p>I am just saying that there’s a lot of stuff put out by these places that isn’t true.</p>

52

<p>Yes, we know you are not making it up. It is common knowledge that legacy status (i.e. attending a school that a parent or grandparent attended) affords certain advantages to applicants at some schools. Many schools are very up front about this and some even publish details on their websites. It is also common knowledge that large donations in the past and expectations of continued large donations in the future can pave the way at some schools for those with wealthy parents or relatives. You are less likely to find this advertised on the web site, but it happens.</p>

53

<p>And some kids don’t gain admission to top schools where they are double-legacies! Anything can happen and usually does!</p>

54

<p>Many private schools have “courtesy waitlists” for offspring of alumni and donors which is more evidence that many many legacies do not gain admission. The colored sticker or special pile for legacy applications is not news. </p>

<p>Mystery99: You do not believe that Muimui has any right to pass on information about Juilliard’s audition process if she has not sat on an audition panel there or auditioned there. She has a child that auditioned there recently and I am sure that some information was shared. Have you sat on the audition panel or auditioned there in the last year? If not, then, by your own words and standards, you “don’t think you have any business telling [yourself] or others how the Juilliard audition works.” </p>

<p>I am sure that occasionally a couple of panel members know who an auditioner has studied with, but with 24 violin faculty at Juilliard, I really don’t think that any of them could possibly keep track of all of the students of all 24 faculty members.</p>

<p>Juilliard like any school knows that the best way to maintain or enhance its reputation is to turn out students that will be successful. One of the best ways to ensure that alumni are successful is to accept the most talented applicants. To do otherwise would be to act against one’s self-interest.</p>

55

<p>Sharing my son’s experience here. He auditioned for the master’s program 3 years ago. He had limited experience with a few of the faculty through summer programs. There were about a dozen teachers at his audition. He didn’t know who most of them were nor did they introduce themselves. He was accepted into the school but waitlisted for the studio he wanted. After speaking to the teacher, it became apparent that he would not get into that studio. He began searching for a studio. All of the communication about studio choice went through the dean’s office. He would tell the dean who he was interested in and the dean would contact the teacher. If the teacher was interested, he would contact son directly. He eventually was accepted into a studio that he was interested in. He chose to attend a different school, however. </p>

<p>Later in the summer we had contact with a local teacher who had had a conversation with one of the Juilliard faculty who heard son’s audition and commented favorably on it. This teacher stated that she was surprised about the original studio waitlist, but stated the teachers never shared their scores nor discussed their ratings for any auditioners. Everything was handled by the dean’s office. I have no reason to believe that this teacher was lying about the process.</p>

56

<p>Mystery-
You have obviously never been on a Juilliard audition of any kind, nor do you know anyone on the inside. you are speculating (I find it kind of amusing that you mention Juilliard teachers from the past who are all dead, you don’t mention present teachers, though it is on the website).</p>

<p>I know teachers who sit on the panels on both the pre college and college level, and your description is bogus. Want to know how major league Asian industrialists get their (mostly daughters) in? They don’t bribe Juilliard (BTW, donors to Juilliard are public record, large donations to a non profit have to be disclosed by law, if you looked at Juilliard’s filings you would be able to see such large donations, and give specific examples where industrialist gives huge money and son/daughter gets in…unless you can cite an example, you are simply claiming it to be true). The reason their kids get in is because they are groomed to get into a high level program from the time they are young; Young Korean girls from well off families will be tutored at home, they will routinely have multiple lessons a week, and from an early age are practicing long hours, when other kids are doing 1/2 hour a day if lucky and are in a sense “bred for battle”, to get into Juilliard and other such programs. </p>

<p>Are there cases where maybe someone got in because a relative gave a huge chunk of money to the school? Maybe, but I can also guarantee you the person got in because they met the standards; the money might have given them an edge, but arts schools are very different then let’s say an ivy with a legacy, because their reputation is based on the quality of the students in the program, and because these schools are not that big, even a very few rotten apples would stand out.</p>

<p>And again, I challenge you, have you ever been to student recitals at Juilliard? Have you ever seen the Juilliard orchestra? If so, if Juilliard admits mediocre students, then it would be quite obvious in the performances…and guess what, I actually go to those performances, I have seen the recitals, the chamber music, the orchestra programs, going back a number of years, and I have rarely seen anyone I would say “***?” about them being there. </p>

<p>And frankly, your statement is belied by the many people who get in there who are not rich (most of the kids at Juilliard are not rich, no matter what their background is) and plenty of kids are like Violin dad and MuiMui’s kids, they worked their tails off and got in on merit, it is apparent in the performances when you attend them. I don’t know where you claim your ‘inside knowledge from’, but the fact that you rely on inuendo, some idiotic you tube videos (that are meaningless), and fantastic claims about people buying their way in that you have no way to back up, except saying “I know”, which unless you yourself are an insider, which obviously you are not, makes no sense. You also are insulting a lot of very talented kids who worked hard to get there, and the parents who sacrificed a lot to help get them there.</p>

<p>There are really corrupt programs, but in general it isn’t at US music schools. Where you see real corruption are in places like Korea and China, where professors are paid relatively little and the culture and tradition is that people are expected to bribe professors and administrators to gain admittance to the programs (Administrators at Juilliard have stories about parents trying to slip them mystery envelopes when the children of Asian background are applying to audition, or teachers where parents attempt to give them an envelope to try and curry special favor). If I had to hazard a guess, I would suspect Mystery is from such a background, and is projecting what goes on in programs in those parts of the world onto Juilliard. </p>

<p>Yes, legacy admits happen, but from everything I have seen and heard that isn’t common in music schools, that is generally with academic schools, simply because admitting someone simply because they are a legacy or someone gave a huge donation would become very obvious, and it would cause them a lot of problems. Among other things, students have juries at the end of the year, and a mediocre student admitted as Mystery says would be as exposed as a nudist at a prayer revival meeting when they went in…And as I and others have said, the admission process is not perfect or even necessarily fair, there are times when a really talented student may not get in and someone a bit less talented does get in, but that is a far cry from a corrupt nepotic organization that is nothing more then a bribery factory admitting no talents to curry favor and get huge donations; the latter is a fantasy, quite frankly, one easily proven wrong by showing the quality of the kids in the program.</p>

57

<p>Mystery99, The audition process was as explained to me by a member of faculty after my child had a sample lesson with him. It was exactly as recounted to me by another parent who went to the information session. It also completely tallied with what my child experienced when in the audition room. We are not rich, and have no money to donate nor any legacy. We are neither Korean nor of ethnic minority. We don’t even live anywhere near NYC to be able to do any networking. We don’t have any resources nor intention to “bribe” professors - I only use the word “bribe” because you have suggested in Post #1 that unspecified members of the faculty and administration of the school are “corrupt” and were manipulating admissions. The word “corrupt” necessarily denotes acceptance of monetary or material advantage. I consider these allegations irresponsible and outrageous unless you can substantiate them, and your examples of “evidence” are very poor indeed. </p>

<p>However, your allegations have the serious effect of putting down admitted students - as if they didn’t get admitted on their own merits, but have bribed their way into the school. While my child was accepted to every conservatory (9 in all) she had auditioned for this year, and had no reason to believe that others should look upon her admission to Juilliard as other than a result of fair play, there may be others who were admitted to Juilliard but not other equally prestigious schools who did not deserve to suffer the innuendo. </p>

<p>I have asked you to state your “theory” so that readers can make sense of your accusations, but you say you don’t have time to answer my questions. If you have better facts and evidence to present on what you say happens in the audition process, do so. Otherwise, you should stop firing like a loose cannon.</p>

58

<p>As ViolinDad said: “Juilliard like any school knows that the best way to maintain or enhance its reputation is to turn out students that will be successful. One of the best ways to ensure that alumni are successful is to accept the most talented applicants. To do otherwise would be to act against one’s self-interest”. </p>

<p>Would that not be true of any professor in any department who wish to maintain a prestigious studio? Why would any professor wish to admit mediocre students of little potential into his studio, unless it were only for direct monetary advantage? Hence the seriousness of Mystery99’s allegation and the reason for my invitation for Mystery99’s “theory” of how he thinks it works.</p>

59

<p>Muimui-</p>

<p>Exactly, the point is that no school, even an Ivy league school with legacy admits, is going to water themselves down to the point that Mystery claims. I have read the book someone else cited on legacy admissions, and I can speak with some knowledge that the number of legacies admitted is relatively small (I believe in the book he says 20%; from what I am lead to believe, that number is dropping). Of that 20%, though, many of them may have gotten in in part because they were a legacy, maybe even beating out more talented students in the process, but they aren’t mediocre dummies (though obviously those exist as well; I had a cousin who attended an Ivy back in the 70’s who made a decent amount of money writing term papers for the rich but not so well endowed intellectually). </p>

<p>What Mystery is doing is taking a very real phenomenon, one that few of us deny, where a student can get admitted over someone who would otherwise be considered more talented (the key here being the relative term, more talented), because they know a teacher or whatnot, but what that leaves out is that it is a relative term, that compared to the ‘norm’ both would be above that level by a long shot. In the academic world it would be like a 4.0 student getting bumped by a 3.9 student, both are high achievers, but for some reason the 3.9 trumped a 4.0.</p>

<p>Is such a process fair? Is it fair to a student who is really good and for whatever reason doesn’t get admitted? No, it isn’t, but no subjective process is, and that includes hiring for jobs, and even admissions to universities. Mystery is taking that ‘fact’ and twisting it, to claim that mediocrities get in because of race, wealth, whatever, and that is so far from the truth it is painful, and what it is is sour grapes from someone who had someone rejected (student, child, relative) and trying to justify why they didn’t get in.</p>

<p>I have also heard myths, like kids who go to the pre college program are a shoo in, that they have most of the slots taken up, and that isn’t true either (easy to believe, of course, because the students are at the school, they could be studying with a teacher who also teaches at the college, and so forth). Stats show that a pretty good number of pre college students don’t get in there. There is one student we became acquainted with the story of who seemed accomplished, was at the pre college for years, and got rejected from the college but accepted by the NEC/Harvard joint program (which indicates their relative level). But those who don’t know assume it is a shoe in, which the many pre college students sweating to try and get in would find funny if they weren’t sweating it).</p>

<p>Is the process perfect? No. Is it the best process going? No, I have criticisms of the way programs handle auditions, what they do in them, and so forth, and I have been on the other side of this myself with my S, I have seen kids in the program he is in that got admitted when my son got rejected who frankly now are playing worse then he did then, but somehow got in; but compared to most of the kids out there playing the instrument, t he kid was still at a high level). Any process is going to produce some duds, people who don’t make it, don’t work out, and the admission process to high level programs like Juilliard have issues like that. </p>

<p>I think what upsets me more is that someone like Mystery is denigrating the kids in the program, claiming that if you get into J it is because it is a setup, that somehow they didn’t have to play until their fingers bled and muscles ached, parents didn’t have to stretch budgets and find ways to try and support their kids (including long hours waiting in lobbies and cars as the kid did lessons, chamber music, orchestras and the like), and that is dead wrong. I doubt the person we know as Mystery even thinks of that, they are trying to rationalize why whoever they were involved with didn’t get in, and the easiest way is to claim that the program is fixed. It is kind of like when you read accounts of people who work with prisoners, 95% of them will tell you they were railroaded, didn’t do what they were accused of, etc…now certainly with some of them it is true, but 95%? Same with admissions to Juilliard, I am sure some percentage might raise eyebrows, but to claim it is the whole process? Please.</p>

<p>There have been books written about Juilliard, some of them are fawning PR stuff, but many of them cover the good and less good sides, and they pretty much say what most of us have, that there are times when things aren’t totally fair and equitable, but they also talk about the sheer talent that is there. (We just picked up a copy of a book called "Nothing But the Best: The Struggle for Perfection ", written about 20 years ago). They detail where, for example, a Delay could help a potential student with a hard luck story get in (like helping a Russian Jewish emigre, with literally nothing, but talent, get in even though he had missed the application deadlines and such), no one denies that goes on. </p>

<p>But on the other hand people like Delay in her day, and other teachers, have nothing to go on but their reputations as teacher. A teacher who accepted mediocrities in return for something, the way mystery claims they do, would turn out mediocrities, and people looking at their track record would say “why the heck would I study with that person, they turn out nobodies who go nowhere”, eventually it catches up to them. </p>

<p>It there were a conspiracy at the school level, as Mystery seems to claim, then even more so, we should see clear proof that the Juilliard name is a sham, that it is a den of mediocrity, because if the school decides who gets in based on how much money they can donate, it should be across the board. What belies that is that performers coming out of Juilliard still seem to be at the top of their game, when they come out and do recitals, or when the Juilliard orchestra plays, they get glowing reviews, and there is a reason for that. I have heard arguments about the soloists and none coming from Juilliard (which also makes me suspect that Mystery’s rejected candidate was a violinist, for a number of reasons), which in recent years has been true, but it is true of most other of the major music programs. Curtis has Hillary Hahn in recent years (and perhaps Ray Chen, if he does what I think he will), but if you look at the top soloists of the ‘modern era’ (let’s say last 20 years), few if any of them are coming from the US conservatories, most are coming out of Europe…does that mean NEC, CIM, Peabody, Rice, et al are equally as corrupt? I don’t think so. </p>

<p>The other thing that blows apart the conspiracy of dunces idea is that anyone who knows Juilliard will tell you that the administration doesn’t have that kind of power, that teachers would be the first one to rebel if told to admit mediocre students who gave a lot of money to the school, there is an interesting power balance there that often, quite frankly, rests more with the teachers then the administration (Polisi has written about this, and it is evident in both the pre college and college environments from what I have seen). Conspiracies only work when all the parties are on board, and one thing that schools of any kind are known for are the battles between administration and teachers, so it is unlikely that a conspiracy like that would be able to be kept quiet.</p>

<p>This thread is really ironic in many ways, because I am not one of those who views the music world with rose colored glasses, or worships at the ground of Juilliard or anyplace else, I have seen the rough edges, the questionable stuff, but that doesn’t take away from the fact that those schools have excellent programs and teachers, whose output is self evident. I tend to get indignant at injustices, or inequities, but replacing indignation at inequities with trashing the entire program is an inustice, if not to the school, to the kids who are breaking their tails, crying more then a few buckets of tears, to try and reach for a dream who had the talent and hard work to get in there or are trying to get into Juilliard or another program.</p>

60

<p>I really believe that unless you or I were actually sitting in the audition, we simply can not judge how/why one student got in over another. </p>

<p>Some kids will practice their audition repetoire 12 hours a day for a year and perform a flawless audition, but once admitted (and don’t have that kind of time) might not live up to that audition. Others might have a bad audition and be far superior once they are in the conservatory.</p>