Last month, we discussed the Opera Candy website’s petition “Stop Predatory Audition Fees” and the furious discussion of the topic which erupted on social media. I followed with great interest a number of conversations regarding the audition/application fee argument, the application process, and the frustrations both singers and administrators feel. Clearly, there are things both parties can be doing better. Singers need to do a better job of researching opportunities and learning about the business, developing the perspective they need to know where they fit in at this point in their development, and making sure they read carefully and follow directions. Administrators need to provide more information to help singers do this and to generally be more transparent about the entire audition process.
In the interest of furthering that dialog and helping to find solutions that fit the needs of both artists and administration, I responded on my blog, Mezzo with Character (www.MezzoWithCharacter.com), collecting and encapsulating some of the proposals offered by various singers in various different conversations on social media. I then added my own thoughts on the pros and cons of each. What follows is a revised and updated version of what appeared there.
For the purposes of this article, the following definitions are in place:
• Application fee: Charge to apply for an audition.
• Audition fee: Charge to audition.
• Young Artist Program (YAP): Paid apprenticeship. Examples: Ryan Opera Center at Chicago Lyric Opera, Tulsa Opera, Santa Fe Opera, Chautauqua Opera.
• Pay-to-sing or training program: Training program which charges tuition to singers for classes or performance opportunities. Examples: Music Academy of the West, CoOPERAtive, Land of Enchantment.
What Singers Want
1. To pay no application or audition fees for YAPs, training programs, or mainstage auditions.
Argument for No. 1
Companies have a lot of overhead involved in processing applications for YAPs and pay-to-sings and for doing auditions—but so do singers, who are footing the whole bill out of pocket. Singers must pay for travel, hotel, accompanist fees, coaching and lessons, wardrobe, and room rental for warm-up space. This is cost of doing business, but audition expenses are also cost of doing business for opera companies. We need jobs. Companies need singers—and, specifically, they need young, inexpensive talent for things like educational tours, comprimario roles, and covers. Why should singers—especially emerging artists, many of whom can least afford it—subsidize companies’ audition tours?
“I’ve been talking about this for years,” says soprano Marcy Richardson. “It is not my job as a singer to help any opera company pay for travel, room rentals, or administrative costs. That is their responsibility as a business. I take care of my responsibilities as a business by paying for lessons, coachings, travel, music, and materials. I’m not paying for another business’ expenses on top of my own.
“I make my opinion known by acting with my wallet. I will not pay a fee, and if my manager tells me there is a fee for an audition, I tell him to please pull me out of the audition and ask him to tell the general director why. I will not put up with it. I will walk right out, I will cancel, I do not care. The check is in the pianist’s name or it is not being written. It’s one thing to talk about it and whine about it and complain about it, and another to act on it. I act on it, and if it costs me jobs, whatever. Hire the people who want to pay for these admin fees; be my guest. The end.”
Argument against No. 1
Some companies say that the cost of the application process, including personnel to review applications (often not full-time employees but people who are paid by the hour) and hear the auditions, travel and hotel expenses for two or more staff members, space rental, and pianists is prohibitive without the income from singer-paid fees. Companies that don’t charge fees, such as Fort Worth Opera Festival, have cut back on audition tours (FWO does them every other year and regularly receives complaints from singers because they no longer audition annually) in order to be able to afford not to charge fees.
“It’s troubling, since there doesn’t seem to be a great answer for anyone—every solution that’s posed has its issues,” says Clare Burovac, director of artistic operations for Portland Opera. “One thing I will say is that the conversation always makes me rethink the issue and see if we can change our fee or eliminate it entirely—and I’m unable to figure out a way to make it happen without eliminating or shortening the audition trip, unfortunately, which would not enable us to hear as many singers.”
2. Many singers don’t object to paying a modest fee to help with processing for training/YAP opportunities, but believe these fees should be fairer and they should get specific benefits for their money.
• Option 1: Minimal processing fee ($5–$10) with additional reasonable charge assessed if an audition is granted.
• Option 2: Full fee paid up front; full or partial (75 percent) refund given if no audition is granted.
• Option 3: Pay full amount one time with no refund. But if accepted for an audition in the future, no further fees are assessed.
• Transparency regarding how much time is spent looking at each application and listening to sound clips.
• Written feedback so the applicant can improve his or her application the next time.
Argument for No. 2
While acknowledging the immense time and effort administrators put into processing applications, it’s not fair for singers to have to pay the same amount for the privilege of having an application processed as they would for an actual audition, where they receive more benefits for their money. Feedback would help singers know how to improve their future applications and decide which companies best suit their current level of development, which would cut down on the number of ineligible applications companies must process.
“Almost all of my performing friends have agreed that they would be much more apt to pay if the fees were connected with an actual audition and not with the first round of applications—having to pay up front simply for the privilege to be respected as an artist is a knife twist to those who have already committed so much time, passion, and money to this art form,” says tenor and composer Griffin Candey. “For some, the quickly inflating volume of these fees simply puts a bitter taste in our mouths—for some, it turns them away entirely. For a business that requires young blood on a fairly regular basis, I don’t believe that driving away any new potential is ever a viable consequence, regardless of administrative fees.”
“From a YA still in YAPland, I have, and always will, look at app fees as a tax deductible donation to the arts,” says mezzo-soprano Courtney Miller. “If opera was a thriving for-profit business, it would be ridiculous. But it’s not. App fees are a necessary evil, but they go toward covering the company’s costs that go into having auditions/travel. I get it. It gets irritating when fees are $40+. And that’s when I choose to not apply unless I think I have a good chance and it would be a great opportunity. It’s also lame when companies don’t give you a confirmation/rejection until a week before, therefore making travel more expensive. App fees still, I’m OK with.”
Argument against No. 2
More book and record keeping for the companies. Financial departments don’t appreciate having to issue refunds, because it can get messy. Writing feedback for each of the hundreds or thousands of applications is incredibly time consuming, and this time must be compensated, which could make fees more expensive. It’s not a company’s job to provide applicants with feedback.
“The notion that it (charging fees) should be excused for YAPs because it’s on-the-job training makes no sense to me at all,” a writer signing as Another_Young_Singer wrote in the comments section of my blog. “There have been major lawsuits over this loophole employers find by having ‘interns’ otherwise known as unpaid or underpaid employees who do labor for ‘experience.’ But the unfortunate part of the equation is that without YAPs (at least in the States) it’s almost impossible to move on to roles with any respectable opera companies, and that is the real heart of the outrage Cindy [Sadler] references as unique to this generation. The millennials are the most debt-riddled generation in the better part of a century, and job opportunities are terrible in all fields, particularly the arts. The YAP system acts as little more than an extension of academia, wherein singers without certain schools and connections on paper are not even considered, and this further entrenches this hierarchy of overpriced music schools. There are some companies that will not even hear a singer for a YAP unless they attended a major conservatory, and then these same bureaucrats are the ones encouraging singers to ‘find their own path.’ It’s completely dishonest. . . .
“Opera companies need to do more than offer four to eight slots to young singers who all invariably attended one of about seven schools or a handful of other YAPs,” the anonymous writer continues. “Perhaps more open auditions (I know it’s a pain to have “cattle call” auditions), because something has got to give. Cindy is right to keep encouraging young singers to make more informed choices, but at some point the business has to take some credit for limiting those choices.”
“Unfortunately, companies who charge a modest fee (that often includes a pianist) or accept CDs or videos and give them the same consideration are a rarity,” says soprano Christina Hager. “There are companies and programs out there who are currently charging large application fees, and it leads to the question: Why? After paying some small and many, many moderate fees, and then seeing a few companies with huge fees, it leads singers to wonder and get upset
. . . then nobody is thinking clearly.”
3. Greater transparency. YAPS, competitions, and pay-to-sings should publish specific guidelines for the number, Fach, and developmental level of singers they are looking for each season, as well as other information related to auditioning.
• What experience does a singer need to be considered for this opportunity? For example: “Applicants should have completed a master’s degree or equivalent and sung at least one leading role in school, community theater, or a program.”
• What voice types are needed this season?
• How many positions are open?
• How many people typically apply?
• How many audition slots are available?
• What is the fee specifically paying for—application review, travel and hotel for the panel, pianist, or audition space?
• If an application fee is assessed and the singer does not receive an audition, what does that fee pay for?
4. Clarification of the application process.
• How much time is spent reading each application?
• If sound clips are required, is every sound clip heard? How much of it? Does the processor listen all the way through?
• What are they listening for? Is potential taken into account or are they looking for perfection?
• Are the recordings grouped by voice type?
• Are some applications fast tracked (i.e., those with previous YAP credits, manager recommendations, etc.)?
Argument for Nos. 3 & 4
Singers will have better information on which to base their decisions about which companies to apply for and will be less likely to apply for opportunities they are not ready for, thus cutting down on the number of applications. Singers who lack the business savvy to apply appropriately will be identified fairly quickly and obviously. Also, greater transparency will do a great deal to ameliorate frustration singers feel toward the system.
“There exists a lack of transparency on the companies’ parts, and that open information about the right auditions to take is not being readily made available to us. Oftentimes that is looked upon as ‘inside information.’ This is part of the ‘us vs. them’ mentality, unfortunately,” says soprano Christina Rivera. “There is a real barrier felt and a lack of honest communication [practiced] by a company who supposedly cares about helping generate young artists and improving the art form. There is very little information on how companies operate, and even after a master’s degree in opera, I still am in the woods. (Do they teach that in the YAPs?)
“I also think any good business transaction involves something worth-while being received when a fee is paid,” continues Rivera. “I understand that companies have no time and need good singers, and there are administrative infrastructures that are in place to streamline the selection process and the money making for the greatest of ease. . . . All I am saying is that I don’t think it’s fair to call young artists ‘entitled.’ We look to the leaders, such as YAPs, to guide us, and they are not.”
Argument against Nos. 3 & 4
More work for administrators who are already pressed for time. It will not completely eliminate inappropriate applications. It may mean that singers who don’t quite fit the standard but whose talent warrants attention will not be heard. Admins may be reluctant to share some of this information for various reasons, including backlash.
“I think that one of the primary issues is that many singers feel entitled to auditions for companies—that their years of hard work or their natural awesome talent should make it required for them to be heard,” says bass-baritone Daniel Klein, who is also the executive director of North Shore Music Festival. “No one is forcing anyone to apply to competitions, Young Artist Programs, or training programs. However, because of this feeling of entitlement, they do not honestly look at themselves, the business, the craft, and the art.
“If you don’t like it, don’t buy into it and find your own path. The great stages of the world are littered with singers who never sang in a YAP and who never won a competition. I do think there are many people out there who take advantage of aspiring artists, but I don’t know that it is our responsibility to deal with it.”
5. Cheaper alternatives to traditional audition formats.
• Video screenings as a preliminary round; singers of interest could be invited to in-person auditions if necessary.
• Group auditions in which a number of companies band together to hear singers over several days in one location.
• Broadway-style “cattle call” auditions that allow more singers to be seen without applying—show up early to sign in and wait around until you can be heard. Callbacks for those singers that companies are interested in.
• More house auditions.
Argument for No. 5
Many companies request videos from established professionals in lieu of an in-person audition; videos are hard to tamper with; and even though a live audition would be better, videos could be a cost-effective alternative for both singers and admins. Singers would be assured of presenting their best take. The initial cost outlay for a video might be more than an audition fee, but the videos could be used for multiple applications and also for publicity on singers’ websites.
With group auditions, companies could split application processing, organizational, and scheduling duties and the costs of hall rental and accompanists. They might also be able to hear a larger field of applicants. Singers would have the advantage of paying for only one trip and one pianist; although any fee assessed might be higher than a single audition fee, it would be justified by the convenience and overall savings. Training programs and YAPs both could participate, offering more opportunities to singers who don’t win a YAP position.
Broadway-style auditions might allow more singers to be heard and would eliminate the need for applications.
House auditions allow singers to avoid the hassles and expenses of New York, which can be overwhelming to young people who have not spent time in such a large city. They might be cheaper. Admins would not need to spend money on travel and housing.
“As a non-NYC YAPer, I would rather do lots of research on an opportunity and pay the (potential) extra money to travel to that company’s hometown to be heard, “ says mezzo-soprano Morgan Earle. “That way, I rest assured knowing that this company is happy to not be spending money on NYC costs, thus (hopefully) my money is being put to good use by a company I know I can trust with my application fee because I did the research.
“This business is cynical enough, so why make it harder on ourselves?” Earle continues. “Don’t allow YAP Tracker to do the work for you. I have had success this season with getting the info I need from opera companies concerning what they’re looking for talent-wise. This info isn’t always laid out on the YAP Tracker page, but it is available if you’re serious and smart enough to ask! If you get a fishy mass correspondence of any kind that seems ‘predatory,’ email that company and nicely ask for an explanation—then use your sound judgment whether or not to move forward with the application/audition. If the trash can smells, it’s probably got garbage in it.
“However, I do agree that if opera companies would work together to share costs of renting audition facilities for a month or two in NYC,” concludes Earle, “a lot of the issues could be solved and everyone can go about their business as usual.”
Argument against No. 5
It takes some special knowledge to film and edit videos well, so singers would need to learn this and obtain equipment or pay someone to do it for them. Some administrators might prefer in-person auditions only. A video screening would create an additional step and more work for admins if they planned on having a second round of in-person auditions.
For group auditions, coordinating the schedules of a large group of administrators (with their responsibilities to mainstage and other commitments) could be like herding cats. The various entities would need to coordinate to delegate various organizational duties, which would be a lot of work. Singers who were unavailable or sick during the chosen audition dates would be out of luck. Singers who have a bad audition day would risk making a bad impression on multiple panels, not just one, and this could significantly affect future as well as current opportunities. Group auditions might cut down significantly on the overall number of people being heard, since the time allotted for auditions might not necessarily be longer than they would be for individual company auditions.
Cattle call auditions (typical for musical theatre) mean singers dedicating an entire day (rather than an hour) to the audition process. Singers could be “typed out” and not heard after waiting around for hours. Singers would be forced to use the pianist provided rather than have the option to bring their own. They may not be able to show their best work due to the long waiting period. Those traveling from out of town would still have to plan to stay extra days for potential callbacks, which could end up being wasted time/money if not called back. Administrators would lose the ability to preselect candidates and might have to wade through many singers who are not sufficiently experienced for the opportunity.
House auditions are not necessarily less expensive than trips to New York. Plane tickets to smaller markets can be extremely pricey, and there are fewer flight options. Hotels may be cheaper, but taxi service in smaller cities is usually more expensive and less reliable or easy to find than in New York. Singers would be dependent on the house providing an adequate local pianist or would have to go to the expense of bringing their own.
“Exactly how long would it take, if companies without big budgets stopped coming to NYC at all, for singers to start complaining about how much it cost to go to them for auditions?” asks soprano Kathleen Berger. “I’m still waiting for a real answer to that question. My guess is about one-tenth of a billionth of a hot second.”
“Donors would much rather that companies use their money to pay the singer they hire rather than subsidizing the singers they don’t,” agrees Ben Schuman, a member of Baltimore Concert Opera’s Board of Directors. “Would you rather have a free audition in Memphis or Albuquerque or Seattle that you have to travel to at your own expense?”
6. Improvements in professional courtesy, including the following:
• Introduction of the audition panel when you walk into an audition (or a piece of paper posted outside the door, announcing names and titles of the panelists).
• Always receiving a rejection notice, even for mainstage auditions, even if it is just a form letter.
• Not penalizing singers who have paid and gotten their materials in on time by extending deadlines for others.
• Not eating or talking on the phone when people are singing.
• If providing a pianist, make sure that person is a credible opera accompanist and knows standard repertoire.
• Advance notice (emergencies notwithstanding) if there are changes to published information, including matters such as changes in personnel hearing auditions, roles available, faculty who will be teaching at a training program, etc.
Argument for No. 6
Civility and mutual respect are not only professional but improve the experience for everyone and help create a better industry.
Argument against No. 6
How can one argue against treating your colleagues respectfully? Some of the aforementioned do create some extra work for already pressed administrators, however, and taking the time to implement them may take time from other tasks such as reviewing applications, resulting in fewer singers being heard.
Here’s my question, and I pose it to singers and administrators alike: What happens next? How do we work together to improve the process for everyone? Where do we go from here?
One thing that I think must happen is that there must continue to be civil discussion of these issues. In the interest of facilitating such a discussion, in the next installment I’ll present the above six proposals to a panel of opera company administrators and ask for their responses, including what improvements they would like to see from singers. The results will be published in a future issue of this magazine. If you have additional proposals or questions that you would like to submit for possible inclusion in the article, please send them to me at editorial@classicalsinger.com.
Ultimately, of course, every company, competition, YAP, and training program is going to decide on its own what, if any, changes it can make—and it’s unlikely that everybody will be happy with all the solutions. But that’s the very definition of compromise, isn’t it? Everybody gets some things they want, but nobody gets everything they want. If the Met can do it, why can’t we?
