<p>Got the same advice from a piano professor for my DS. Go with no debt for undergrad. He said the only “name” anyone will care about is the top degree (telling DS he would likely need 3 to stay competitive). As long as you have a good teacher who will prepare you for grad school auditions, I would go with no debt!</p>
<p>^ Hmm. I’ve been debating whether I should ask my own related question on this thread, but this comment (above) pushes me over the edge. Sorry, annie43! I don’t intend to hijack your thread. My question is closely related to yours, but in a different phase of education.</p>
<p>So, WAstamper, it sounds like your son’s piano professor thinks the top degree should be a “name” degree, if possible.</p>
<p>Here’s my question …</p>
<p>For vocal performance grad school: A well-known, big name VP school with a well-known, big-name voice teacher, at the price of AT LEAST 23K in debt over 2 years (plus existing undergrad debt) … OR … a lesser-known VP school with a lesser-known teacher (though the school and teacher are still very good), and the possibility of no debt (except for the existing undergrad debt)?</p>
<p>Is “the name” significantly more important because this is grad school? Or is it a reasonable and clever choice to go for zero debt over the “big name?”</p>
<p>(FWIW, finances ultimately dictated his undergrad decision, overruling his “big name” acceptances, and he has no regrets about that decision. However, he always envisioned that he’d get the big name in grad school. So, here we are debating this again. Do YOU think it’s smart to put finances ahead of “prestige” for grad school?)</p>
<p>I would LOVE to hear any and all opinions. Thank you!</p>
<p>There are so many other considerations to take into account, it is not wise to make these the only two. Potential stage time, success of recent grads, work opportunities while in that school, the stregnth of the opera directors they hire, the stregnth of the market you will graduate in…If it’s a “big name” with few opportunities to perform at the school, that big name will not get you far. And there are plenty of “big names” who have far too many students. Frequently the amount of money you are offered is in direct proportion to the amount of opportunities you will get on stage. An MM without a lot of stage time does not get you off to a very good start.</p>
<p>^Good points, musicamusica. So allow me to clarify. </p>
<p>My son is confident that he is needed and desired at both schools – great stage time & work opportunities at both. Good success of recent graduates at both, though the big name likely has more “success.” Good opera directors at both. Average strength of the market in both communities (son would likely move after grad school).</p>
<p>Basically, he’s considered the big pieces. For him, between these two, it basically comes down to money versus big name.</p>
<p>Opinions?</p>
<p>All things being equal? I repeat:frequently the amount of money you are offered is in direct proportion to the amount of opportunities you will get on stage. </p>
<p>I can only think of a four big names that have the sort of sway that you are referring to and three of those programs are tuition free.</p>
<p>This is opinion based on too many unknown quantities.</p>
<p>^Hmm. I’m not referring to any particular “sway.” Just the fact that it is a big-name music school that is associated with some “prestige.” (I’m trying to think of the 3 programs that are tuition free, lol! I can think of two.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, I get your point. Am familiar. That is often true. Not always.</p>
<p>Sorry, but I’m looking for opinions on the question I posed – the things I don’t know. I’m not really looking for second-guessing of what I do know.</p>
<p>What is the point of prestige or as you put it “the name”,if the name itself has no sway in the professional world. Some programs are well known enough, that agents show up to audition students. That is sway. That’s why I used that word. ok…I still have no idea what you do not know or do know. Sorry I could not give you the opinion that you are looking for. Good luck with all that.</p>
<p>have at it gang!</p>
<p>^ Okay. If that is your definition of “sway,” then this big-name school has sway. But, my point is, I’d prefer that my questions here be taken at face value. I have asked a fairly simple question: money or big name. Like most people, I don’t want to be second-guessed about the things I’ve left unspoken. It is not up to you to ensure that I’m asking the “right” question for myself. I find that approach to be condescending.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Also condescending ^. I think we both know what’s going on here. I was not looking for a specific opinion. I responded to your post the way I did NOT because you “didn’t give me the opinion I was looking for,” but because you gave me no opinion about the question I asked. Instead, you made a few presumptions and issued something close to a lecture. (“There are so many other considerations to take into account, it is not wise to make these the only two…”) When I clarified and specifically said, “for him, it basically IS about money or big-name,” you bothered to repeat yourself, question the basis for his scholarships, and conclude that one couldn’t possibly issue an opinion – there are “too many unknown quantities.” If you can’t answer the question … just don’t.</p>
<p>Just like you, I’m smart enough to know what I’m asking and why. </p>
<p>
[quote=musicamusica]
have at it gang!*</p>
<p>I see this ^ as an attempt to triangulate. It sounds like you’re trying to make it an “us” against “her” phenomenon. Not productive or healthy for a helpful discussion. I noticed in years past that the music forum was the friendliest, most helpful forum I ever visited on CC. There’s a lot of good going on here. I hope to keep it that way.</p>
<p>My son and I are under a whole lot of pressure right now. We are looking for very last-minute advice about an often-asked topic. I sure hope I get the chance to hear some people’s opinions.</p>
<p>([Does the level of education make a difference in the money vs. “prestige” decision?)</p>
<p>Simplelife, I think you will need to hear back from vocalists on this one. I think it is too different from instrumentalists. ( If your son played oboe, I could give you some pretty good advice). Also, it would help to know what your two schools are, but I can understand that you don’t want to put them down.</p>
<p>When my daughter goes to grad school, these will be my/her considerations:</p>
<p>–go to a big name school
–try to go for free or close to it (may study in Europe, very cheap)
–if she doesn’t get a big scholarship, determine if anyone did get one at that school. She doesn’t want to pay a lot if one or more grad students aren’t. That will mean she is not #1 at that school.</p>
<p>Tough decision! It is a crying shame these schools cost so much.</p>
<p>There are some names that might open doors for you and some that might get you
“street cred” if you are starting your own studio (as in people only know the name Julliard if they are not in the know about music schools), but in the end the roles experience and teacher’s ability to launch you into the next level are more important. If all were equal I would go with lower debt. DD has made that choice herself based on the very well known facts musicamusica stated that money DOES equal roles. So in the prestigious school, if the money is equal to what they are giving others it may make no difference. But if it is not, the roles may not be there no matter what they say right now. The big name schools cast what they pay for. You have to really know the school’s actual practices. Preferably with some inside info. </p>
<p>Your S has some fine choices and the decision is a hard one. I would be reluctant to take on debt if all were equal. The name does not get you that much and there are going to be so many more expenses in the future that debt would weigh on him. There may be even more study such as the post masters performance certificate that is becoming more common. And much more travel and audition expense post MM.</p>
<p>From my current experience of listening to over 500 singers a year audition, knowing the background bios of singers I am paying to hear, and hearing what is happening from studios around the country (and world) of all sizes and levels of prestige, what matters most is the teacher (technical work and guidance), performance experience (in-house, regionally, summer programs), and the standards to which the students at the school are held in terms of language diction and comprehension, musicianship, stage craft skills, musical style (in no particular order). Singers have to be able to get agents to work in opera in this country, but that can come out of success at summer programs and in competitions. No agents are beating down the doors of any school wanting to sign up another singer. I have heard singers from just about every first and second tier school in the country (quite a few others, too), and while there are some schools I would advise against strongly (some well-known and discussed as a reach on this forum), there are students of excellent and iffy quality from almost all of them. </p>
<p>As the parent of a string player, I learned rapidly that it is totally different for them, where what matters is the level of other players in the cohort. If a string player cannot get into one of the premiere institutions (including exclusive summer programs), aspirations should be adjusted. There are string players who do their lower level college years in the exclusive conservatories, then go to excellent teachers in the state universities to complete their educations (on a free ride), and they do just fine professionally. </p>
<p>The debt load of conservatories is unnecessary for singers, at any level. In the past I would have said that Julliard and Curtis might be exceptions, but even those schools do not guarantee anything. I have known singers who went to both, heard their progress, and where they are now. None of them are better off from what I have heard and know of their careers. Sure, they had the fun and enrichment of NYC culture and life, but it did not advantage them personally and professionally. They know a lot of people, but that does not guarantee anything either. A few teachers can make a call and get an audition for a singer, but it does not guarantee the gig. What gets the gig is how they sing and what they have done. </p>
<p>My strongly held (and expressed) opinion about avoiding debt is both professional and personal. Life is too long to be burdened with few options.</p>
<p>“have at it gang” was meant to keep things light. I apologize for that. “Triangulating” is not my style.</p>
<p>^Thanks for the apology, musicamusica. I appreciate it.</p>
<p>Thanks to the others for weighing in!</p>
<p>It sounds like maybe big name schools are more important for instrumentalists than vocalists. I hadn’t really thought of it that way prior to this discussion, but it makes sense. Interesting.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You got it, woodwinds! Those were exactly my son’s considerations (though he didn’t consider Europe). Much worked out as planned … but the “big scholarship” leaves something to be desired. So, it’s back to the drawing board. Apparently, this has been an exceptionally difficult year to apply to grad school. Not sure, but that’s what we’ve been told. Funding is exceptionally tight! And you’re right – I really don’t want to name or talk about the specific schools. Thanks for understanding.</p>
<p>Thanks to you, too, Singersmom07. You said,
You got it. One could get the biggest scholarship in the school and still have to take on debt to pay for it. You mentioned the importance of “open doors” and "the teacher’s ability to launch you into the next level.” So true. That’s what makes it hard to turn down the big name school. The big-name teacher is tempting not only because that teacher is known to be an amazing teacher and person, but because that teacher will very likely have far more connections; that teacher’s name would likely be more impressive on a resume; and that teacher is a known quantity who has consistently produced excellent results. We’re not SURE, but we THINK that the lesser-known teacher likely has fewer connections; will possibly be less impressive on a resume; and has no widely-recognized track record at this time. BUT, how important are those things anyway?? (That’s the big unknown!)</p>
<p>IF the lesser-known teacher can teach my son to produce a consistently great, healthy sound (and we’ve heard some really good things about the teacher)… well, what an awesome deal! Every teacher, just like every student, has to start somewhere, right? Today’s most well-known teachers were not always well-known!</p>
<p>One could say, “23K+ isn’t THAT much to pay for a ‘big name’ school and teacher.” But one could also say, "Just think how many more auditions and summer programs that 23K+ could buy! And think of the post-grad freedom one would have with no additional debt!”</p>
<p>And so turns the hamster wheel … this teacher or that teacher? … this school or that school? … take the debt? … or keep the freedom? … Hahhahaa. Get me off of this thing! :)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>^Honestly, this is the way I tend to lean. If I were making the choice for myself, I would suck it up and take the lesser debt, take advantage of more auditions and summer programs, and aim for the big name later in the form of a performance certificate. But, (a) there’s no telling whether “I’d” make it into the big names on a third try; (b) I’m not choosing for ME … my son is choosing for HIM; and (c) I don’t really know enough about the audition, performance, and career phase of all of this to know whether my intuition is clever or dumb – and I sure don’t want to give bad advice to my son!</p>
<p>My son goes back and forth. He really likes the lesser-known school a lot! He can totally see himself there. But he sure hates passing up an opportunity with a big-name teacher in a big-name school that he also likes a lot. Forgoing big opportunities is scary. And he’s sorely, sorely disappointed that a lack of money is once again getting in the way of his success. He has turned down MANY excellent opportunities because of money! It appears to us that the wealthy have enormous advantages here. Much more so than in other strictly academic fields. So, we’re both sad that it’s once again come to this. (And yes, we realize that a majority of you are likely in the same boat. We know we’re not alone.)</p>
<p>lorelei, lorelei … always good to hear from you! Thanks so much for posting!</p>
<p>You mentioned these factors as some that matter most:
</p>
<p>See! As obvious as those things should have been, I wasn’t thinking in that direction! I was focused on the well-known teacher and the “prestige currency” that could possibly be exchanged for future career success. From what we’ve heard, this “lesser-known” school does have a reputation for being strong in all of the areas you mentioned! Terrific! Uplifting.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And THIS ^, I did NOT know! Really? I honestly didn’t know that singers have to get agents to work in this country! So clueless. And so, isn’t that a reason to lean towards a big-name school? Can one get their foot in the door with a good agent more readily if they have that big-name stamp on their ticket? Do agents prefer to take on clients from big-name schools because others hone in on those big names, giving agents more street cred for themselves? Or is it ONLY about whether you’ll pay the agent’s bills and whether you can really sing? (Please excuse any inherent – and genuine! – stupidity within my questions!)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Amen. I love that ^. It frees the mind. And, oh, how I hope it’s true! 
I have never liked “the rat race” or “keeping up with the Joneses.” And pursuing these big-name schools, as awesome as they may be, feels like both a rat race and a grasp at “prestige” – “prestige” that may or may not have any “exchange value.” It’s just that we’re all so often told that a big name is a promise at a good chance for success … </p>
<p>I guess it simply boils down to this: Just how much of that “promise” is true … and what’s a reasonable price to pay for it? I suppose THAT’s the meat of the question.</p>
<p>Thanks again to all. You have given us lots to ponder. It will all be over soon, one way or the other! 
Thank you, again!</p>
<p>SimpleLife: agents do not take students out of any name school. They take them after they have come to their attention at competitions, at the behest of another performer/conductor/professional, and/or hearing them in performances at which their other clients are performing, often summer events, since singers already employed during the regular season almost always already have an agent.</p>
<p>^Beautiful. That’s good to know. Thanks, lorelei!</p>
<p>Lorelei (or anyone else for that matter) - you shared your point of view on voice vs. string students relative to taking on debt. Where do wind players fit on that spectrum? Does the strategy change?</p>
<p>I have much less personal knowledge about wind players, DesignDad. It becomes painfully clear when hearing any university orchestra how strong the wind students are, because the wind playing is so exposed in the repertory. If my child were a wind player, I would want to hear recordings and live performances of the orchestra. Wind ensembles, with their wide and rapidly developing repertory, are also revealing. It is possible to hear live-streaming of concerts from many of the major music schools. These concerts are not yet available in any kind of audio file, to my knowledge, so it will require diligence to check the performance schedule of any school under consideration, find out if this option is possible, and then listen in real time to the concerts. </p>
<p>If students are required to participate in marching bands, concert bands, etc., beyond their individual practice, chamber groups, orchestra, even wind ensemble, it is a disadvantage to their development as players, because of the wear and tear on the body and inevitable tiring. All musicians need to be fresh mentally and physically to be able to pay attention to what they are doing and how they are doing it at all times. I cannot speak to the issue of how important the level of playing in ones cohort is in a wind or brass studio. </p>
<p>None of this speaks to debt, of course, but rather which level and type of school can provide an appropriate education for ones goals, and how to figure that out. My personal opinion is that college debt should be minimized, and that it is unwise to shackle oneself to the financial burdens of unlikely to be achieved ambitions. An undergraduate education needs to be general enough to allow for a change of plans. Conservatories are trade schools for the most part, and unless they are tethered to an academic university with a strong core curriculum, the general education they offer is inadequate. So the goal, IMHO, should always be to find a teacher and situation that can help one explore their dreams without limiting their future options.</p>
<p>I just wanted to report back that my son has decided to attend CU Boulder for grad school! (MM VP)</p>
<p>I posted this same exact message (below) on my “Colorado Boulder for VP?” thread. CU Boulder was, in our minds, the “lesser-known” music school and the “scholarship school” in this “Prestige vs scholarship decision.” My son and I are both very, very happy with his choice! I’m really proud of him for choosing scholarship over prestige! That’s the way I would have gone if it were my choice. But I was tentative about strongly advising my son because … well, it’s his decision and HE is the one who has to live with any and all consequences of this decision.</p>
<p>We are both very excited about this decision. He made the decision following a really great visit. The voice program seems to be really solid! From what he can tell so far, they are focused on all the right things – good technique and instruction, plenty of performance opportunities (4 operas +), and high standards for diction, comprehension, musicianship, repertoire, and style. The voice faculty is noticeably extraordinarily cohesive! They seem to take the approach that they are a team, and that the team is responsible for ensuring that the each student gets from the program just what that particular student needs, though each student is assigned to one particular studio. Ideal! My son’s CU voice teacher made a great impression on him. He is smart, personable, kind, and talented. It is clear that the CU Boulder School of Music has an outstanding reputation within the state of Colorado and has some outside connections, and various performance opportunities exist as a result. The faculty members that showed my son around were great communicators and were very personable. The facilities were beautiful. The surrounding town is beautiful. They were able to extend a generous aid package to my son as well, which was extremely important to us. What more can be said?</p>
<p>Since announcing his decision on CC, I have received more than a handful of PMs from parents of other CU Boulder “kids” who have great things to say. </p>
<p>As my son makes his way through grad school there, I’ll be sure to sporadically share more. This school seems like a gem! How wonderful that he found himself a great new home – and in a place that hadn’t initially attracted his undivided attention! </p>
<p>All my best to all of you in your college searches! :)</p>
<p>I just wanted to comment on what Lorelei said about instrumentalists/string players, and the answer on whether it is better to go to the ‘big school’ depends. The thing about the big schools is because they have the name and hopefully the faculty to back it up, the average level of playing is going to be higher. The upper end orchestra at Juilliard (I am using that term, Juilliard doesn’t have fixed orchestras as such, but they tend IME to pick the top notch kids for certain orchestra performances, and this is what I mean) is incredible and if you compared it to a program with more varied levels of admission or one that is smaller, it might not be as good, and I could argue that going to Juilliard in that case might give an advantage, especially to a student who hadn’t had much orchestral experience until they got into school. On the other hand, is it worth going into ridiculous debt? I would argue no, simply because a lot of instrumentalists go on to grad school these days, and it is just too tenuous to have those kinds of loans.</p>
<p>A lot of it depends on the teacher, too. You can get into a program like Juilliard, Rice, etc, and get a teacher whom you would do worse with then a teacher at a ‘lesser school’. Getting a great teacher, one you know you can fly with, at a ‘lesser’ school could be a lot better than a ‘run of the mill’ teacher at ‘the great school’, which can happen, despite what they will tell you, not all their faculty is going to necessarily be world class, but more importantly, may be great with some students but not a particular one. </p>
<p>There is truth to the idea of a teacher and connections, but it depends on the teacher. Some teachers with a ‘great reputation’ from what I hear on the grapevine may be good teachers, but do little to help push their kids forward, others make it a point to help the kids beyond the lessons, introducing them to people, getting them into programs and so forth. It could be a ‘lesser name’ teacher because he/she has her nose to the ground, at a ‘lesser’ school, knows more people and networks, unlike the ‘great teacher’ who specilalizes in preparing kids for competitions to become the next great soloist…it all depends.</p>
<p>The advantage of the ‘big school’, the one that can be so selective because it has the name and reputation, is that it can drive a student forward, and that is a big deal. Being the big fish in a small sea can work for some students, for others it would cause them to stagnate because there was nothing to ‘reach’ for, whereas being the small fish in the big sea can drive someone to move forward. Being the best student in a good studio may be less rewarding then being the bottom of a great studio. </p>
<p>As far as wind versus strings, this is mostly pure speculation on my part, but I would argue that the quality of the orchestra program along with the teacher is important. Even though most string players will end up in ensemble work, their training is still incredibly weighted towards solo repertoire, and while they of course do orchestra and chamber, they aren’t quite as tied to the ensemble work in school in terms of their learning. Wind, brass and other ‘orchestral’ instruments, on the other hand, do a lot of their teaching on orchestral and ensemble works, that is their ‘rep’ to a large extent IME. Having a great orchestra program IMO could be a big benefit to wind and brass players (btw, I personally am of the opinion that with strings, far too much emphasis is put on the solo rep, that they should be working more on orchestral and chamber pieces; other then certain sonatas, almost all the work is on solo pieces. given the odds of a solo career are worse then mine becoming president, and most musicians do ensemble work, it would make sense) and the quality of the orchestra may be huge. Even for string players the level of playing in orchestra and chamber can be a major factor.</p>
<p>Thank you, musicprnt! You have helped validate the decision my DS made to attend a program where the cost was somewhat higher than some of the alternatives. My DS said many of the things you have when discussing his desire to attend Juilliard rather than the other university based programs he had available. He felt that the level of the full orchestra, as well as the rapport with the teacher, and the possibility for networking was greater there. He is also the type of kid who feels motivated by strong “competition”. The presence of great players in his instrument pushes him to be better, so being the big fish in a small pond is not ideal for him. He felt that Juilliard would have the best orchestra, taking all instruments into account, not simply the strength of his section. If he did not play a wind instrument, perhaps this would be less critical, but knowing he would rarely play solo work, he felt this was important.</p>