<p>Hi to all!</p>
<p>Just out of curiosity...if one were to apply/audition to schools which required prescreening cds, how would one go about MAKING the cd?</p>
<p>Is it done on a computer or at a recording studio?!</p>
<p>Ask around your music dept or go over the fence to Loyola and find out who
(among the students studying music engineering) records demo's or recitals for a set fee. My D has had this done several times on campus for about
250.. You will also need to hire an accompanist.</p>
<p>Or, if you have a computer with imovie and a decent mic, record it on that, extract the audio, convert it, and burn it on to a cd.</p>
<p>If you decide to do it yourself and do not have a lot of previous recording experience, get someone who does have experience to listen to your CD before sending it in. I have heard recordings that were thought to be pretty good by the people who made them but, in fact, were rather horrible. They made the typical novice mistakes of recording in a poor acoustic environment, incorrect microphone placement, poor balance between voice and accompaniment, pickup of lots of background noise, improper setting of record levels and failure to normalize the final product.</p>
<p>I used to have free software that would do it BUT that was on my computer at home, and I brought my dad's laptop to college ha. So, ideally I would like to do it by myself, (of course editing with other people,) but I hopefully can play piano, record it onto the computer (somehow,) and record that and my voice onto a cd. I don't know if that'll work well (it worked alright for the cd I sent out to other places!)</p>
<p>I used to make my CDs at a recording studio, but it really does cost quite a lot. </p>
<p>A good idea is to buy a good quality microphone that is conducive to working well with your instrument/voice-type and use sound-editing software such as Garageband (if you have a Mac) and go from there.</p>
<p>Hmm... not sure I'd endorse the two-track self-accompaniment idea. You're supposed to send an unaltered, one take performance. That involves interaction with a pianist.</p>
<p>At my son's school, the audio recording services were available at a ridulously low cost to students, with the recording done by music technology majors. He made numerous festival audition cd's and I don't think the one time fee was any more than $50. I would check costs at Tulane. Your major expense would probably be your accompianest. As fiddlefrog says, an unaltered, one take performance is the standard for audition and prescreening submissions.</p>
<p>Another hint - admitting on a public forum that you submitted an edited tape to other schools and are considering doing the same again is not the wisest thing to do. How many male voice majors do you suppose are looking to transfer between where you are now and the particular schools that you have mentioned in your postings? Some of the growing number of college admissions workers here on CC may be in a position to identify you from your postings and applications.</p>
<p>BassDad-Well, it was a last minute thing and it wasn't a pre-screening recording. It was for an audition and there were no guidelines as to how to prepare it. So, I didn't really KNOW the harm. Knowing now I can't go back and change the past.</p>
<p>I'd agree that the recording shouldn't be edited, but I have not found the guidelines mentioned her on websites such as Oberlin, CMU and several others. Are these things common sense or are they spelled out someplace?</p>
<p>Common sense and many schools such as Indiana use the terms
"recorded without the aid of artificial enahancement". We are fortunate to
have access to a professional recording studio (free of charge) here in
Hollywood and whenever we use our recording engineer friends services, he
writes and signs a breif statement that no artificial enhancement was used.</p>
<p>Whether or not a school publishes a written policy, I think that most students should realize that an audition or prescreening recording is expected to represent the level of technique, artistry and sophistication at which they are capable of performing live on a good day. Anyone who uses technological means to represent themselves at a level beyond their actual capabilities should realize that they are not conforming to the expectations of those who will spend time listening to those recordings and making important decisions based on them. I do not think that Jeremybeach is trying to misrepresent himself; he simply needs a recording pretty soon and perhaps does not have a lot of time or money to spend on it. Still, he needs to consider certain ethical and legal ramifications before simply doing what is convenient. This seems to be a common theme in my reaction to his postings in this and other threads.</p>
<p>In the case where no accompanist is available or is completely beyond the means of the auditioner, it is possible that some schools would accept a recording of the type that he mentions: a self-recorded accompaniment track that may or may not have some edits, paired with the best of a number of vocal tracks that were recorded in a single take without edits. I believe that even the schools who would accept such a recording would want to know how it was made and why it was done that way. Submitting such a recording without a complete explanation is at best naive. Publishing the particulars in a public forum that may be monitored by some of the schools involved is potentially self-destructive.</p>
<p>As a singer myself, I know that it is rare for the same person to be both a good singer and a competent accompanist, particularly in their teen years. Even if the OP happens to be quite gifted in both areas, he would probably do better to concentrate on the vocals without having to take time out to practice and record the accompaniment then limit himself by being forced to fit the vocal track into whatever the accompaniment happened to be. If he has the time and money, it would be far better to hire a really good accompanist, collaborate in real time and submit the best of several single takes of each of his audition pieces. If he does not have either the time or the money, the onus is on him to understand the policy of each school who will receive his recording, whether or not that policy happens to be published on the Internet. That means taking the time to speak with or email the teacher or teachers at each school and ask specific questions about what they think should be done in this individual case. Saying "I didn't really KNOW the harm" afterwards is not an excuse if no reasonable attempt was made to contact those who could have provided a definitive answer. The very phrasing and capitalization used in that phrase indicate to me that while he may not have KNOWN, he darned well could have suspected.</p>
<p>I agree BassDad - what confused me a bit was the one take part.</p>
<p>You <em>can</em> do several takes...as many as you like! You can record the same song/piece multiple times, but played through to completion. Then you pick the best one to send (of course, you can also start recording, and stop if you make a mistake, and start a new "take".) There can be no edits to the "take" you send, but you can pick whichever one is best!</p>
<p>Since for pre-audition, the expectation is that the adjudicators will see you live, I agree 110% with Bassdad. You never want to "overrepresent" your abilities, since the adjudicators will see what you are really capable of on audition day.</p>
<p>BassDad, or anyone for that matter, </p>
<p>For a voice CD, Would you consider having the piano accompaniment recorded first and then i sing to that, edited? I would be singing the song all the way through without stopping. </p>
<p>Thanks,</p>
<p>I think it would be much better if you could do it the expected way, i.e. get an accompanist, do several takes with accompaniment and voice recorded together, then select the best single take for each song. That way, you are not forced to fit the song to the same pre-recorded accompaniment every time you do a new take. You can make eye contact with your accompanist, try different things and see what works best.</p>
<p>If you cannot find or cannot afford an accompanist, I would suggest that you check with each school that will receive the recording to see if they are OK with the method you suggest. Perhaps they might even be able to help you find an accompanist in your area. If the issue is that you cannot afford to pay someone, perhaps you could approach a teacher or a church musician and ask if you could do some volunteer work for them in return for them accompanying you on this recording.</p>
<p>There are a number of CD's available of accompaniments recorded without the voice or instrumental solo part. These are primarily intended as practice aids and some people are very firm about not wanting them used in place of a live accompanist for audition or demo tapes. I think what you are talking about is similar in principle, so you really should ask before doing it.</p>
<p>I would never advise using canned music.</p>
<p>Seems like they would be listening for ensemble musicianship in real time (impossible singing with a tape and essential for a performance major) as well as for voice potential.</p>
<p>We have found that the most inexpensive way to record is to use a Zoom H1 recorder, available for about $100 through B&H or Amazon. It’s a recorder with a built-in microphone. You download your recordings directly into your computer and create your own CDs. The sound quality is much better than what your computer can capture with a microphone. That way you can do all the takes you want, and choose your best recording to send in.</p>
<p>Definitely don’t accompany yourself. Get an accompanist and do it right.</p>