Here's an interesting experience I had recently with NATS adjudicators.
A bit of background: I'm 23, and a tenor. Last year, I won Advanced I for
the chapter auditions. (I'm not entirely sure how much of an accomplishment
that really was, since I was one of two people in the category.) I was going
to do the regional auditions this year, but since NATS last year, I've
managed to keep very busy. I've done a full-length solo recital, and I've
started getting roles like Nanki-Poo, Ralph Rackstraw, and Count Almaviva.
(Almaviva got to be the first full-length standard role I learned, and
that's exactly what the whole thing was, a good learning experience.)
Anyway, I didn't quite have the time to focus on all the rep needed for the
regional auditions, so I just did the chapter auditions again this year.
I'll do regionals next time out.
Part of staying busy over the last year is that I've sung for a lot of
people, either in auditions, coaching sessions, performances, etc. I've
always gotten good, constructive feedback from people, and I've managed to
make friends with people who are good to be friends with around here. All of
this is both because of and in spite of who my voice teacher is - he is a
wonderful teacher, I've studied with him off and on for six years (on for
one, off for two, on for the last three) I've never learned more from
anybody else, but he deliberately keeps himself out of view and out of
politics. He also teaches a method that isn't particularly in favor in this
neck of the woods - he tends to go for a more open, rich sound, and most
teachers around here seem to prefer an ultra-bright tone that to me sounds
almost nasal. At any rate, one of the things I'm consistently told by people
for whom I audition is, "I'm surprised I've never heard of your teacher!
He's doing a wonderful job with you!" However, *because* he's not a "name"
or anybody with "connections," I've had to pretty much make my own luck and
really try to get people's attention myself. Which is fine, but sometimes I
get the impression other singers are looking down on me to a certain degree
because I'm studying with somebody *they've* never heard of. More often than
not, these singers *are* studying with some of the "names" around her. Oh
well.
So, anyway, I walk into the Advanced I (25 and under) chapter auditions
again about a month ago. I had a good variety of pieces prepared - Il mio
tesoro, a Duparc melodie, a Schubert lied, and a very obscure American art
song by Anthony Donato.
Having sung for as many people over the last year as I have, I shouldn't
really have been surprised by what followed. In theory, NATS judging is to
be anonymous, right? Not this time - I knew all three of the judges, from
encounters over the past year and beyond. Two sopranos and a tenor - both
sopranos taught where I went to college, so had been on my juries numerous
times. One of the sopranos was also the teacher of the person I beat in the
same category last year. The other soprano, the teacher of a couple of
friends of mine, also seriously disagrees with my teacher's pedagogy. The
tenor was somebody I knew by reputation pretty well, and with whom I had
been in competition at an audition a couple of weeks beforehand, plus whose
students had been in the chorus of the production of The Mikado I had been
in.
In short, when I realized who the adjudicators were, what went through my
head was, "If it had to be any three people in the world..." Suffice it to
say I did not feel like knowing the judges was something working in my favor
this time around.
This year, there were three people in the category - another tenor of my
teacher's and a soprano. The other tenor, a 20 year old, went first. His
problem was, he'd been out of lessons for a couple of years, he was giving
up smoking, and was still getting back into his game. Plus he was including
an aria that the judges were predictably going to rip him a new one for -
i.e., E lucevan le stelle. Big mistake for a 20 year old. (Probably big
mistake on my teacher's part for letting him do it, too, but it was
explained to me as there not being a lot of other options at the time the
paperwork needed to get in.)
Then I went. Nerves were killing me, which was something that hadn't
happened to me in a looooooong time. The German, "Auf dem Wasser zu singen,"
was first - and I biffed it in a couple of spots. Entrances didn't come out
right, and words got muffed. Still, the nerves were cleared, I was mad
enough at myself after that that the French piece went off without a hitch,
as did the Donato. Il mio tesoro, an aria I'm very comfortable with, wound
up needing a breath extra than what it usually needs from me, but I felt
good about it other than that. However, what was distracting was that the
soprano who disagrees with my teacher was constantly shaking her head almost
angrily, as if it was truly upsetting her that I was singing the way I was.
The soprano went up, and sang "Ebben..." from La Wally, something that she
was probably about fifteen years too young for. The voice had no depth, no
ring, no color, and she just stood there, no real sense of presentation, and
she actually looked away from the audience the whole time. I don't remember
what her other rep was.
I got the sheets back that night, and my teacher and I looked over them.
Mostly good comments - they didn't mention the goofs in the Schubert at all,
nor were they the scathing indictments of my technique I was expecting. The
tenor really liked my rendition of Il mio tesoro, and very nice things were
said by all three. The main things that were mentioned (besides "Relax!")
were a disagreement in vowel production (I was producing a fairly rounded
"ee," for example, and one of them wanted it more spread), and wanting a
brighter sound. Fairly predictable comments, all told, given who the
adjudicators were and who my teacher is. (He looked at them and said, "Well,
we already knew there would be disagreement there.")
The result? They declared "NO WINNER" for the category. Beyond each of the
three of us having at least one moment of glaring fault (mentioned on the
sheets or not), I suspect part of what happened was deadlock - voice types
will be harder on their own voice type in judging situations, based on what
I've seen, and you had two tenors and a soprano being judged by a tenor and
two sopranos.
At an rate, it was a good lesson for me to learn, I think - don't let the
fact that you know the judges stress you out. The more people you meet in
the voice arena, the more likely it is to happen in the real world, anyway,
and if you let it stress you out, it's going to noticeably get in the way.
Not everybody is going to like you anyway, and you don't really have any
control over that, so don't let it worry you. I think, to a certain degree,
politics probably didn't help my teacher much over the course of the whole
two-day set of auditions (as he pointed out, "Which winning students this
year had teachers who don't go to NATS meetings regularly? Zero."), but I
don't think that had any bearing on this particular instance. I think it was
just a good hurdle for me to learn to get over.
> From: Reg Boyle <bandb@n...>
> Reply-To: vocalist-temporary@egroups.com
> Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 15:09:00 +1000
> To: vocalist-temporary@egroups.com
> Subject: Re: [vocalist-temporary] ATTN: All NATS adjudicators
>
> At 02:24 PM 13\4\2000 -0600, you wrote:
>>> write on a notepad and then take time between singers to put his notes on
>>> the
>> sheet ...
>>
>> Ah, but that's the rub. In order to give more singers opportunity to be
>> heard, NATS auditions are always run on a very tight schedule, so there is no
>> time between singers.
>
> Dear Adjudicators and Performers,
>
> Pardon my input from across the Pacific. I fully sympathise with both the
> performer and the adjudicator here.
>
> As you may recall I've done the scribe part for adjudicators and it's
> an awfully pressured task that is simply not satisfactory from anyones
> point of view. The advantage of allowing the adjudicator to give full
> attention to the performer is offset by the problem of having to
> simultaneously whisper to the scribe some carefully considered
> words, have then received correctly and then written legibly by
> the overworked volunteer.
> The apparent advantage of the adjudicators doing it themselves
> places an enormous load on someone who is expected to give the
> performer all the body language of a sympathetic listener.
> Even an efficient short hand scribe would have insufficient time
> to transcribe the notes between performers .
> It appears that the answer is alternating two adjudicators who
> each write their own notes. An expensive refinement that could be
> offset by reduced auditorium rental costs and would produce a happier
> result for the singers and the audience.
> Best Wishes Reg.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 1.6 Million Digital Images!
> Download one Today from Corbis.com
> http://click.egroups.com/1/3356/3/_/843894/_/955689315/
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> vocalist-temporary-unsubscribe@o...
>
>
>
>
|
|  |
