<p>There is software available that will rip audio from a video file and put it into .wav format, which can then be burned to CD. One such that I have used is Pazera Free Audio Extractor, which can be found via Google. If you are not a techie, you can probably get your daughter or one of her high school friends to download the program, convert the file and burn the result to CD.</p>
<p>You may also wish to have your daughter call the summer programs in question to see if they will accept the DVD in place of a CD. My experience is that some places ask for CD but are willing to accept DVD format so long as the sound is good enough for their purposes.</p>
<p>Bassdad, good advise! already heard from one camp that says they had not edited their page to include DVD yet, but they would absolutely take them!
thanks</p>
<p>Hello everyone!
I have another question regarding recordings… will colleges be able to detect any edits in a track, even if let’s say, several “pieces” of the song/piece are meshed together well?</p>
<p>It is understood (and usually stated) that no editing of a recorded performance is allowed for prescreening submissions. So it would be unethical to edit. </p>
<p>Your prescreen would probably be rejected if editing is detected (and the ears of those judging prescreens are very acute and perceptive). I think that many judgers of prescreens hear only a portion of them so the editing is likely a waste of time (assuming it is done to fix those little glitches that occur several minutes into a movement) and potentially lethal to your application. </p>
<p>If your playing is marginal enough that it requires editing to get you through the prescreen, then the actual audition is probably a waste of your time–there is no editing a live audition. </p>
<p>Ultimately, those judging prescreens are looking for a person who plays/sings musically, produces a beautiful sound, and displays control over their instrument–these characteristics are usually quite obvious within a minute or so and the tiny glitch or two that one would love to edit out does not negate the musician’s gorgeous sound, inherent musicality, and facility on their instrument.</p>
<p>thank you violindad. I am about to start recording very soon and the topic of editing was among my concerns. with the advanced technology, editing almost seems second nature nowadays… a lot of people I know are doing it, or have done it and gotten away with it (especially with unaccompanied tracks where editing might not be as obvious). What I’m curious about is if colleges have some technical device or any way of detecting edits in a track.
btw, I’m personally against the idea of editing; I wasn’t planning on editing in the first place. but so many people do it that I’m also starting to question the real dangers of it. Though I have to say, it’s very nice to know that a few imperfections won’t detract from their impression of my playing.</p>
<p>With the right equipment and some practice and skill, audio edits can be made so that they are virtually undetectable. A typical track on a commercial recording of classical music may have anywhere from a few to over a hundred splices in it and very rarely do you find yourself thinking, “Wow, the sound editor really blew that one.” However, if all of the elements are not right, edits can be pretty obvious when you know what to listen for.</p>
<p>I completely agree with violindad that editing an audition or prescreening recording is nearly always in direct violation of the clearly stated rules for producing such recordings and should not be done. Having caught enough people cheating in this manner, schools are increasingly going toward requiring video recordings which are much, much harder to edit undetectably. Unfortunately, they are usually also more difficult and more expensive to produce than simple audio recordings, which makes the application process that much harder for everyone.</p>
<p>A couple years ago I learned (and have since heard repeatedly) that audio edits are very common among classical music prescreen recordings - not just for college and grad school auditions but also for competitions. I felt like such a rube-- I was floored to hear that “everybody does it” (by which I mean splicing, not messing with pitch.) </p>
<p>This is why so many schools have gone to DVD auditions, where it’s harder to do edits. We didn’t do any sound edits because 1) didn’t know how, 2) too cheap to hire a professional, 3) wow, it seems like cheating.</p>
<p>But I think in the future audio editing will be analogous to extensive SAT coaching, i.e., a way for wealthier families to provide advantages for their own kids. It may be against the stated policies of the admissions committees, but by favoring the most pristine recordings at the prescreen process, they are also encouraging this practice.</p>
<p>While talking with one director at a prominant conservatory, we were told “everybody edits. That’s why we don’t say ‘no edits allowed’ anymore”. She went on to say, just don’t make it obvious. It feels strange to edit the tapes, but at the same time I don’t want my D to be at the bottom of the pile because she is the only one who didn’t edit.</p>
<p>We did go back and very carefully read all the websites, and with one exception, none of D’s schools say “no edits”. They don’t even address it.</p>
<p>Neither glassharmonica’s daughter nor my son did any sound edits to their prescreens and both passed their prescreens at the most competitive schools (i.e. Juilliard, CIM, NEC, Colburn etc.) on one of the most competitive instruments (violin). </p>
<p>If you can’t pass the prescreen (for which the bar is obviously lower than for actual admission) without editing, then you just simply are not going to make it over the admissions bar at the actual live audition. In my son’s case, he needed to do considerably more than just make it over the admissions bar–he needed to clear it by enough to get substantial money, so there was no temptation to edit the prescreen to earn a pointless live auditions. </p>
<p>Admissions ears are wise to what goes on. Therefore, I suspect that they allow some blemishes not to bother them if the prescreen otherwise demonstrates a mature musicianships and command of the instrument. If anything, the occasional blemish is a mark of honesty (i.e. those recordings without a blemish are either those of people that have edited or those of incredibly accomplished performers who had better produce at the live audition).</p>
<p>Editing may be common now (although when my son applied several years ago, there were explicit instructions NOT to edit), and it saddens me. My son also was invited to audition from every UNedited prescreen he sent. Maybe I am just a purist, but editing seems unethical.</p>
<p>Im the last analysis though, it may backfire. Kids who try to hoodwink, or manipulate the prescreen process, often end up over their heads at auditions. At auditions, there are no “redos”, no splicing, editing, or otherwise trying to put something other than the real ability forward.</p>
<p>I used to feel exactly as you do, violindad, (hence the totally unedited single-take prescreen last year) but in recent months I’ve heard a few scary tales, albeit about MM prescreens. One family (who spent a large sum on a professionally recorded prescreen tape for their daughter last year) told us stories of accomplished violinists, seniors at major conservatories, being denied Juilliard auditions because of minor flaws in their tapes. Maybe they were just being over-cautious, or maybe it’s just harder at the MM level. I do know that the bar for prescreen differs from school to school. Mannes has one of the highest bar for prescreening because they have limited space/slots for auditioners. I know a student who was a Curtis finalist and got a full merit scholarship to NEC but didn’t get through prescreen at Mannes. CIM told us that they have a relatively low bar at the prescreen level, i.e., they have more slots for auditions. </p>
<p>So before you spend thousands on a professional recording, consider which conservatories you are applying to and what their standards are for prescreening. My favorite prescreens were the DVD recordings because they are impossible to fake. Perhaps some families figure out how to patch in superior sound, but the video and sound must match up, so there can be no splicing.</p>
<p>Want to edit my post but it isn’t possible.</p>
<p>I realized, I haven’t even discussed this with my D or DH. So I’m speaking from my gut reaction to the whole thing… didn’t mean to come off so… stiff. Seems like a lot of extra work to do, and I can’t imagine any of us doing it or having it done for a college audition, but…</p>
<p>Would a store-bought CD indicate that it’s been edited? I think so, as part of the credits. So I think the same standard would be true for prescreen and audition CDs. Identify on the cd that it’s been edited. That way, you are presenting the best of your best, and you’re stating that you are doing so. Best of both worlds</p>
<p>Sometimes the printed matter distributed with commercial albums includes technical credits and sometimes it does not. In nearly all cases (other than perhaps single concert live recordings), it is taken for granted that the recording has been edited.</p>
<p>Several years back, it used to be the expectation that audition or pre-screen recordings had not been edited. From anecdotes posted here and others to whom I have spoken, it seems that that is less the case in the last few years for a variety of reasons. It seems to me that undergraduate institutions are missing the point if indeed they are disqualifying applicants based on a bobbled note or two who otherwise demonstrate musicality and potential for growth. I suppose there will always be those who value technical ability over artistic expression. I think that this is a case where the old adage, “Be careful what you ask for, lest you get it” applies, and in both directions.</p>