Choral Competition - Judges Discussion Thread

Judges for the up and coming Choral Competition may use this thread to discuss matters pertaining to it.

Some discussion has already taken place privately via the PM system, but it may be made available for public viewing at some point in order to give the competitors a better idea of what the judges will be looking for come submission time.

Thanks Mike!

Here is a copy a PM I sent recently to the rest of the judges.

Originally Posted by leightwing
Here are my thoughts regarding an approach to assessing submissions. I suggest we think in terms of a work’s potential for performance. Simply ask yourself the question, “Would I want to perform this?” I think that this approach to judging encompasses a lot of territory.

Effective choral writing increases a work’s potential for performance, and includes the following characteristics:

-Audience Appeal
-Originality and/or uniqueness
-Idiomatically effective writing:
-Differing textures that appropriately highlight the selected text - this includes things like key changes, tempo changes, dynamics, articulation, and even changes in the accompaniment. It also includes effective settings of text - examples: where to use a melody in unison or octaves - or where to switch from two-part writing to four-part.
-Effective use of form
-Compositional continuity - to include elements like style and idiomatic stability - both harmonically and melodically.
-Balanced use of the ensemble.

Naturally, it follows that the things that reduce a pieces potential for performance are:

-Uninteresting or poor quality text
-Poorly executed setting of text - such as the ineffective use of melismas if applicable
-Inappropriately or awkwardly set accents (one of my pet peeves).
-Excessively long pieces - I don’t think we’ll have to worry about this one.
-Excessive or unreasonable call for divisi.
-Ranges not appropriate for a typical choir. (Remember, most choir members are not soloists)
-Excessively difficult harmonic or melodic shifts (Reasonably challenging is OK)
-Hard to read score (sorry, but presentation is key for me with music and food)
-Mostly Strophic writing (same or very similar music set to different verses)

Any and all comments, questions, and such may be sent to my e-mail adress: scs03c[at]fsu.edu Please use "Choral Competition" in the subject line so I know not to delete any of it. I suggest that once the submissions come in, we divy them up according to judge talents. This way it isn't a random free shoot and everyone's pieces are heard fairly by a judge that knows most about those pieces. However, if a contestant wishes to have a particular judge judge their piece, that may also be taken into consideration. I've never judged anything like this. What exactly should we be thinking about?

Certainly, we all need to view all submissions. I would like to propose that whatever the guidelines are, all judges are allowed to nominate something like one half of the field for inclusion in the next round. So for instance if there are 15 submissions, I get to nominate seven pieces. From that list (which could have 15 different names on it btw), we advance the top five vote getters - or in other words, the five pieces that were nominated the most. Then from there, perhaps we do a similar proceedure to find a winner.

This is all just an off the top of my head idea and has within it the possibility of many variations. Certainly, we can't nail down any solid numbers until we know how many submissions there are. It may turn out that only a half a dozen people get their pieces in by the deadline.

Originally Posted by leightwing

This is all just an off the top of my head idea and has within it the possibility of many variations. Certainly, we can't nail down any solid numbers until we know how many submissions there are. It may turn out that only a half a dozen people get their pieces in by the deadline.

I don't want to do this to be lazy, just to let you know, but here's an idea for a sort of pre-round:

If every judge is given a portion of the pieces - sort of a pre-screening type thing. If they want to advance it to the next round, then they nominate it, at which time at least two other judges view it and okay it. Likewise if a judge wants to cut the piece out of competition, at least two other judges must view it and okay the drop. If more than two judges view it and opinions differ, majority rules. If there is a tie, one more judge must break it.

Following this, there will be fewer submissions for all the judges to view, thereby decreasing the workload. However, if this feels too lazy, feel free to veto.

I agree with what you said, I think that's going to be the best way to tackle it.

Keep in mind that the number of submissions we usually end up with in competitions such as this is always greatly lower than the number of people who signed up to compose.

That being said, here's some suggestions for judging criteria: Judge each piece upon these topics, all with a grade (1-10), and a comment: Selection and appropriate treatment of text, Substance of musical ideas (themes, motives, development, etc.), Harmonic control (accessible yet interesting and flowing harmonies), Idiomatic and appropriate accompaniment (if applicable), Freshness/originality, Notational clarity, and Sensitive vocal writing (ranges, tessituras, difficulties, etc.).

I got those topics from an existing Song Cycle competition, but they apply here just as well.

Perhaps a rating of 1-10 on each of those 7 criteria, for a total out of 70?

Do we really need points??