<p>I didn't mean to suggest that students should chose schools only on the basis of prestige. In the case of my kid, he is also one of the "minority" referred to; he chose a double-degree program -- in his case, conservatory-only options seemed too limiting, as did University-only options. But it was a hard decision (not for me...I am too academically oriented to have felt at ease about giving up a college education, especially when only 20% of kids succeed in having a successful music career even after Juilliard).</p>
<p>rudysmom,</p>
<p>The answer is somewhat complicated. If we are talking about orchestral chairs, most of the auditions for the positions that pay anything close to a living wage are done blind. That is, the judges do not get to see who is playing for them and are supposed to make their decision solely on the basis of what they hear coming from behind the curtain. In practice, there is a lot more going on behind the scenes than meets the eye or ear. Performing arts organizations have a political side to them that can involve deals getting made, favors being called in, influence being wielded either for or against someone, rivalries being waged, and even some outright dirty tricks. It is very helpful to have a mentor who knows how the game is played, who knows where the real opportunities are, and who has a network of contacts within the industry. Most such mentors are either already in the major orchestras, teaching at one of the better-known schools, or both. </p>
<p>If you look at bios of orchestral players, you will see at least some who started in those third and fourth tier schools. Occasionally you find one who bypassed music school entirely. It can be done, but the odds are not favorable. It takes not only a tremendous amount of talent, but also great networking skills and more than a little luck. </p>
<p>If the student has the talent needed to get into the top schools, there may be money available based on a combination of merit and need. Don't give up based on the published tuition rates alone. You still need to think about paying for grad school and potentially years of support while they are practicing and traveling for auditions, however. If the student does not have the talent needed to get into a top school, then there had better be some reason to believe that they can catch up to the competition.</p>
<p>The truth is that most of the students who go to music school, even the top ones, will never get more than the occasional substitute gig with a major symphony. Juilliard and Curtis combined turn out a couple of hundred grads per year, half or so on orchestral instruments. Add in just the other top schools and you are talking about thousands of entrants each year to an already extremely tight job market. Add in the third and fourth tiers and it becomes tens of thousands. If it truly is only about money, you can get much better odds at the local race track or by buying lottery tickets.</p>
<p>Bassdad,
Thank you for your thorough answer. That's exactly the way I needed it spelled out for me. It makes better sense now but I still had to ask to make sure!</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>I’m coming to the conclusion if your child does not choose to attend the top colleges or conservatories, then he/she should find another profession. >></p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>I will piggy back Bassdad's comments. First, I agree with everything he has said. It doesn't matter WHERE you go for a music performance degree...your odds of full time employment with a symphony (or pay that will support you without another side job) are not promising. HOWEVER, having said that...let's get back to the original question. There are some programs that are not well known outside of regional areas. Anyone ever hear of Grand Valley State? My guess is that if you are a trumpet player, you have. Otherwise, this is an almost unknown school in Michigan. However it routinely turns out some of the finest trumpet players in the country who then DO go on to conservatory programs for grad school. Their trumpet studio has won significant solo and ensemble awards for years at the National Trumpet Competition. I don't think there are many folks who would view this as a "top tier" music performance school and it certainly is NOT a household name like Juilliard or Curtis are to most musicians. And there is another part to my response. My son is a music performance major. His goal is to earn a living playing his instrument. He KNOWS he will be cobbling together many smaller jobs to make ends meet, and he will do that. He also knows that regional orchestras do not pay particularly well, and that he would be a much better second trumpet player than the principal. That doesn't mean he shouldn't continue to pursue his musical studies, and we fully support his decision to do so (as we have since he began at age 8).</p>
<p>In order to keep my question short and to the point in my earlier post, I didn't expand on my comment:</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>I’m coming to the conclusion if your child does not choose to attend the top colleges or conservatories, then he/she should find another profession. >> </p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>I'm sure it came off as being flippant & I didn't mean to convey that at all. I understand the passion behind these musicians' music. My S. is the same. I'm just doing a little exploration. I can only pass along to him what I know & learn. </p>
<p>Everyone has, as always, been very truthful & helpful.</p>
<p>Thumper, agreed. A great teacher at an unknown school whose students are winning competitions and going to top grad schools could be an excellent choice and quite a bargain to boot. Expect the competition for that teacher's studio to be intense, though. People who put in the time and do the research tend to turn up these kinds of opportunities.</p>
<p>this thread dovetails nicely with mine about the gap year since i am reluctant to encourage my son to move in the direction of a performance major if he cannot go to a "top" music school. i tend to agree that, on the whole, this is what a performer will need going into a very tight profession.</p>
<p>Back to the topic of up and coming music programs... Another one worth looking at is the Blair School of Music at Vanderbilt. </p>
<p>It is difficult for a college or university to make a move in the music world without A LOT of money. Music schools are so much more expensive to run than regular programs. A studio music professor will have 18-20 students each year. That is the sum of their teaching responsibilities. Music students pay the same tuition as everyone else. An English teacher will likely teach 2 classes a semester with a class size of 20-30 students, possibly many more if it is a large lecture. An English teacher needs an office. The music teacher needs a reasonably sized studio with a grand piano. Yes, all the science folks need much more space and equipment, but they usually get grants to cover all of this. </p>
<p>That is why you won't find a lot of LACs with performing arts programs. It is just too expensive for them to absorb. Rice had a boat load of money from donors to pour into its programs. (The university itself was built from Texas oil money.) </p>
<p>I guess my point is that even though there may be an increase in talent and demand for performance based programs, it is not likely that you will see an increase in spaces available in the near future. Besides, there are many in the business who beleive there are too many people being trained already because many of them will never end up being employed in music.</p>
<p>Yes...
Thank you Thumper and Bassdad.</p>
<p>The name of the school counts for just about zilch on your resume when applying for the orchestral chair opening. Just like the admissions process, it all boils down to the audition. Now that being said, there is always the spectre of nepotism, real or imagined. As two examples, there is frequent comment and speculation within the ranks of professionals that (a) you'll never be in the violin section of Cleveland unless you've studied with Bill Preucil, and (b) Curtis is the "farm team" for the Philadelphia Orchestra. There are enough examples both for and against these accusations to allow the debate to continue, so yes, it is a potential concern.</p>
<p>As BassDad says, most auditions begin with the screen up. In a number of instances though, the screen drops for the semi-final and final rounds, so the process is not perfect. All other things being equal, it might not hurt if a friendly face on the audition committee recognizes you from somewhere. And he mention contacts... this is far more important in the profession than most realize. It is a small professional world. People move around. Instructors change schools. Orchestral players audition for and get other jobs. The more your name and face (and of course, your abilities as a player) is exposed, the more chance you have of being mentioned for that sub job, that last minute fill in. That's why high level festivals, fellowship opportunities and masterclasses are so important to go to. Besides the learning experience, you increase your exposure, in effect broadening your potential base of support. The idea here is to get your foot in the door.</p>
<p>Conversely, what you do or say may come back and bite you on the bottom in ten years. It does work both ways, so be careful not to burn any bridges.</p>
<p>Finding the right instructor for where you are currently at developmentally and musically is an ongoing process. And it doesn't only include you instrumental mentor, but your ensemble partners, your chamber coaches, a specific conductor or composer. While they may not teach you how to play, the right ones can teach you to be a far better musician.</p>
<p>And two additional schools often overlooked are Lamont (University of Denver)
and Hixson-Lied (University of Nebraska/Lincoln). Denver has a splendid new facility and some very good faculty depending upon the instrument. UNL appears to have very deep pockets thanks to some very generous donors and they appear to have some very innovative alternative areas of instruction
in the aspects of musicians as entrepreneurs.</p>
<p>It would not at all suprise me if both of these names become more prominent in the short-term future.</p>
<p>A side note: we had a far harder time tracking down schools for my daughter than for music options for my son.</p>
<p>Daughter wanted a very specific program: small animal care. Not pre-vet, not vet tech, not vet science, not zoology. All the state schools in the northeast had any number of those options, but they did not provide what she needed.</p>
<p>She wants a career in kennel management and canine training, or possibly as an animal control officer.</p>
<p>We basically narrowed it to two programs: the associate degree programs at University of New Hampshire and Becker College in Massachucetts. (There is a third option in Colorado, but the name escapes me.) We chose the Becker program for two reasons: New Hampshire is a large school, and the program was tiny in comparison to other disciplines; Becker's program was a large part of their draw, the student body was much smaller, and they actually have a college owned and operated vet/boarding clinic on campus, allowing hands on training and instruction. Becker is actually a niche school. Rather than offering a large number of programs, they have a small number of majors, including a top notch equine program and a newly launched computer game design major, one of the few such programs in the country.</p>
<p>If you look hard enough, and ask the right questions, what you need is out there somewhere.</p>
<p>I agree with team_mom. Any serious music student should be doing his/her research into which conservatory has the best teacher for his/her instrument. Of course, this is a very personal choice. There are many fine teachers, and serious students should be guided by their needs in that all-important student/teacher relationship, rather than by the perceived reputation of any school. Curtis unquestionably does have the finest reputation amongst musicians, and Julliard is a close second, if not tied. However, many of the same faculty teach in several conservatories in Philadelphia and New York, so students have more than one way to study with the teacher of their choice. The "second-tier" equivalent might be found in the mid-west, where Cinti. College Conservatory of Music, Oberlin, and IU enjoy fierce competition. BTW, their track-record in the professional world is as good as that of some of the more well-known conservatories, perhaps even better in a few outstanding departments (musical theater at CCM...seems like everyone on Broadway went there!!). Another way to look at the "second-tier for conservatories/university music school" issue is to consider the new "up-and-coming" conservatories, such as the ones at Bard or Gettysburg. These colleges are doing a fine job of attracting excellent faculty, and their reputations will likely develop into impressive ones with such outstanding professors training talented students. I'm sure that the south and the west have comparable schools, but I'm in the east, and my experience is more limited to this region.<br>
Just my $.02 (from a conservatory grad/professional musician) :)</p>
<p>
[quote]
I’m beginning to understand the importance of finding the best private lesson teacher early on. Then, the best possible teacher/professor in college, graduate school, and so on...
So when it’s all done and the college loans are coming in, the purpose of all this preparation, was to hopefully result in a better job/position? Are the truly talented musician/students overlooked that didn’t graduate from one of these “brand name” colleges? I’m coming to the conclusion if your child does not choose to attend the top colleges or conservatories, then he/she should find another profession. I understand one should not choose an obviously lacking institution. But what about 3rd and 4th tier schools? Do employers, symphonies (or whatever the future dream may be) give first consideration to the student from a higher ranking school over a 3rd or 4th tier? I don’t read anyone actually admitting this but it “feels” this way. It puts a whole new slant on college.
[/quote]
All of the answers to this question, have been true. In an orchestral audition, the audition itself is the most important thing, outweighing almost all other factors. However, the responses have neglected to mention one factor in the audition process where education is a very important factor: the resume. Virtually all orchestral auditions today require potential applicants to submit resumes (and usually pre-screening tapes) BEFORE being invited to the preliminary round. Applicants are typically invited based on their experience in other orchestras. Younger applicants (people who are still in school or recently graduated) are judged almost exclusively on the schools and festivals they've gone to, since they rarely have much professional orchestral experience. Adding to this problem, students at the big name conservatorys often have more experience subbing with orchestras, playing in regional groups, and going to the big music festivals like Tanglewood, Aspen, Music Academy, Schleswig, Verbier, etc. In short, it is true that an applicants playing is the most important factor in an orchestral audition, but the applicant still has to be invited to audition.</p>
<p>The vogue for the "New Ivies" is of course a spillover function of the increased popularity of the Ivy League itself, and moreover of the baby boom and increasing cultural pressure for boom grand-babies to go to college.
While there has been an increase in applications to music schools, there has actually been a decrease in the number of Americans learning musical instruments. Perhaps as a result, the wave of music school applicants has not caused the elite conservatories to stiffen the admission requirements, and the level of playing required for admission has not really changed at Curtis, Juilliard, and their peers. While their acceptance rates have dropped due to increased applications, the caliber of students entering them has held about steady.
The same is NOT true for HYP etc; as someone said above, it's now harder to get into Bowdoin than it was to get into Princeton 30 years ago. </p>
<p>That is why I don't quite accept the comparison of an "ascendant second tier" of music schools to the "New Ivy" group. Schools as diverse in nature, quality, and selectivity as Pomona, WashU, Lehigh, and Tufts are thriving on their new student demographic, which is made up of many kids who with the same credentials could have gone to Harvard three decades ago. Music schools like San Francisco, Peabody, NCSA, Boston U, and Michigan are not getting better students because of the drop in the acceptance rates at Juilliard and Curtis.</p>
<p>Another factor that is new, both for the colleges and maybe more so now in the conservatories, is the influx of international students -- mostly from China and Korea, but also from Venezuela and other surprising (at least to me) places that seem to value classical music as much as or more than we do in the US. Oberlin has overseas auditions; Juilliard applicants this year were from Eastern Europe and Asia as well as the U.S. (Though for Juilliard, you have to show up in New York for auditions, which is a filtering factor in itself.) That may well increase the competition and "quality" at some of the conservatories, with the effect that the non-Juilliard/Curtis conservatories will indeed be more competitive over the coming years. It may be that the opportunities for doing something unusual and entrepreneurial is at least as good at a place like Oberlin, especially because almost all the students are undergraduates, as Juilliard, which may account for the outcomes referred to in some of the posts -- but students have to make the opportunities for themselves and make sure that they go to festivals, etc., where they can make important connections.</p>
<p>mamenyu makes an important point about international students, and there are several ways that this large talented group are having an effect. Some of the smaller conservatories have benefitted greatly from full-paying students (from Korea and China, for example,)especially as they do not offer much financial aid to international students.</p>
<p>Same question as before: in what way is that new?</p>