report & recommendations national … & recommendations | national performance competitions...

AGO COMPETITIONS REPORT & RECOMMENDATIONS | 1

REPORT & RECOMMENDATIONS | National Performance Competitions Review Team

The American Guild of Organists

CHRISTIAN LANE National Councillor for Competitions and New MusicSEPTEMBER 2013


In April 2013, the National Council of the AGO approved a temporary expansion of the National Competitions Committee to facilitate a thorough review of our three active performance competitions:

The National Young Artists Competition in Organ Performance (NYACOP) The National Competition in Organ Improvisation (NCOI), and The AGO/Quimby Regional Competitions for Young Organists (RCYO) The members of the competition committee participating in this review are: Michael Barone, host of nationally syndicated radio program Pipedreams Matthew Burt, Director of Music, Christ Church Portola Valley, CA; local RCYO director James Higdon, Professor of Organ, Kansas University; regular judge on international competition juries Jay Peterson, chair of NYACOP

Pamela Ruiter‐Feenstra, organ improvisation scholar, formerly of Eastern Michigan University; former member of the NCOI Committee

Christian Lane, Associate University Organist at Harvard University; AGO National Councillor for Competitions and New MusicHarold Calhoun, AGO competitions support staff

In spring 2013, the review team wrote and distributed a survey soliciting feedback about the current portfolio of performance competitions. The survey was distributed online to the entire AGO membership and was open for responses from June 24 to July 22, 2013; 1,697 responses were received. In general, the Guild’s members feel our competitions are worthwhile activities of the Guild and are admirable in their respective missions. 46% of those surveyed recognized that, in general, performance competitions are a helpful opportunity for young artists, while 48% went even further, saying that they are “a vital service, critical in promoting and encouraging performance excellence amongst our profession’s future leaders.” Only 6% suggested the Guild should not cultivate these programs. As expected, responses to specific queries on competitions processes tended to skew towards the status quo, or current practice. Given this outcome, it is worth stating again that the survey was not, and was never intended, to be a democratic “vote” on competition practices; rather, its purpose was to solicit suggestions, gauge general views and impressions from our general membership (regardless of past experience with our competitions), and to learn where we, as an organization, need to educate these members should future competition procedures differ from the collective consensus. While the review team identified many opportunities for increased focus of mission and improvement of process, the membership nonetheless has a positive perception regarding the current state of our competitions. This enables us, as the Guild’s leadership, to make adjustments in mission and process within a climate of goodwill and support, rather than resurrecting a failing program – this is a real advantage. The survey’s full results can be viewed and downloaded here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/w9heb5g85n0051y/Competitions%20Summary%20‐%20Exhaustive.pdf Our review team met in Cambridge, Mass. on July 29th and 30th, 2013 to discuss survey results and to begin the process of review and evaluation. The team has subsequently met via webEx and other electronic means.


In this meeting, our first task was to compose a comprehensive mission statement for the AGO’s performance competitions: The mission of the AGO’s Performance Competitions is to support organists, professionally and pedagogically, enhancing their ability to communicate effectively as musicians, to inspire and engage participants and audiences, and to foster greater appreciation for the organ, its breadth of literature, and its improvisatory, creative, and collaborative possibilities. This new mission statement guided and informed all subsequent conversation.


NYACOP | National Young Artist Competition in Organ Performance NYACOP has long held pride of place as the AGO’s premier performance competition. Winners spanning several decades have gone on to establish prominent careers in our profession, with many first‐prize winners remaining on the artist management roster long after his or her term as NYACOP winner concluded. This, in itself, is testament to the competition’s historic strength for identifying successful performance artists. It has been fifteen years since a NYACOP winner was retained by management (Ann Elise Smoot in 1998). Additionally, for an open application round that is designed to identify a field of 25 “official competitors,” the 2014 NYACOP cycle collected only 23 applicants (19 were subsequently chosen to proceed). While a winner’s ultimate career outcome and a diminishing applicant pool are by no means the only measures of NYACOP’s success or failure, these realities do lead us to question and evaluate our competition’s mission and goals, its processes, and its outcomes. Our Competitions Review Team has therefore made several recommendations as outlined in the chart below.

CURRENT PRACTICE SURVEY REACTIONS RECOMMENDED PRACTICE RATIONALE

GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS COMPETITION NAME

The National Young Artist Competition in Organ Performance (NYACOP)

There were several comments throughout about the alphabet soup that is the AGO. Many members didn’t understand what “NYACOP” referred to, even after it was defined.

To be determined.

We feel a simpler, accessible name that has both broad appeal and easy recognition will only aid the competition’s perception, to both membership and the public.

MISSION STATEMENT

NYACOP is intended to serve as a springboard for emerging organists to develop their performance ability by participating in the various demanding stages of this Competition.

44%: Highly successful program44%: Admirable in mission, but success could be greater9%: Admirable in mission, but unsuccessful3%: Unsuccessful and needs new mission

[NYACOP] seeks to cultivate and support young artists in organ performance. By encouraging effective musical communication and refinement of technical skill, the competition aims to identify those performers best poised to engage and inspire audiences in years ahead.


ELIGIBILITY: Age

Ages 23–32

62%: Age range is appropriate21%: There should be NO age range16%: There should be a different age range

Ages 22–32

This is an appropriate range that, as best as possible, ensures sufficient maturity to carry out the responsibilities of the winner, but also cultivates performers at the beginning of a career.

ELIGIBILITY: Nationality

The current NYACOP rubric states: This is an American competition. The winner will perform regularly for American audiences. Due to the prohibitive costs of overseas travel and the complexity of arranging recital appearances for non‐U.S. residents, the winner is encouraged to reside in North America during the two‐year period following the Competition. Work visas for non‐U.S. residents are expensive and increasingly difficult to obtain. Payment of any fees for work visas would be the responsibility of the winner. …. All competitors are expected to be fluent in written and spoken English.

Applicants should be advised that a winner will perform regularly for American audiences. Due to the prohibitive costs of overseas travel and the complexity of arranging recital appearances for non‐U.S. residents, the winner is encouraged to reside in North America during the two‐year period following the Competition. Work visas for non‐U.S. residents are expensive and increasingly difficult to obtain. Payment of any fees for work visas would be the responsibility of the winner. All competitors are expected to be conversant in English.

The current rubric is a little off‐putting; we want to encourage participation rather than discourage.

ELIGIBILITY: Other Restrictions

Previous NYACOP First Place Winners and anyone under artist management by the time of the final round are ineligible.

Same.


ELIGIBILITY: AGO Membership

Must be AGO members at time of application

All are welcome to compete, regardless of AGO membership. Non‐members will pay a higher application fee and will be encouraged to join.

We should strive to be as open as possible as an organization, soliciting the largest pool of potential competitors. Competitors who are not currently members will be encouraged to join.

APPLICATION FEE

$75$75 for AGO members; $125 for non‐members

This fee range encourages AGO membership without being a financial hurdle for non‐members.

NUMBER OF ROUNDS

Four Rounds:1. Application with LIVE recording2. Recorded round3. Semi‐final round4. Final round

90%: Four rounds are appropriate10%: There should be a different number of rounds

Three Rounds:1. Application with recording2. Semi‐final round3. Final round

This competition should focus on live performance as much as possible; two recorded rounds are not necessary to determine qualified semi‐finalists

AMOUNT OF REPERTOIRE PER ROUND

Recorded application round: maximum 30 minSubsequent rounds: 30–40 minutes

64%: This is an ideal amount24%: This is too much music per round7%: This is not enough music per round

Recorded application: 20–25 minutesSemi‐finals: 30–35 minutesFinals: a full recital of 55–60 minutes

As we are seeking in part to identify those who will be successful recitalists, a full recital should be part of the competition process. The earlier rounds can identify strong players through less music.


NUMBER OF COMPETITORS

Recorded round: up to 25 “official competitors”Semi‐finals: 7 competitorsFinals: 3 competitors

76%: These numbers are appropriate24%: The system should be changed somehow

Semi‐finals: up to 9 competitorsFinals: up to 5 competitors

Increasing the numbers of semi‐finalists and finalists allows more participation in the rounds that most determine viability as a performer. More opportunity to reach the finals will increase interest among potential competitors. Additionally, if awarding three tiered prizes, there should be more than three finalists.

GENERAL COMPETITION TIMELINE

Repertoire is published 26 months in advance of finals; application is due 15 months ahead

48%: Current timeline is appropriate27%: Repertoire announced this far in advance, but the performance rounds should be more compact22%: The whole thing should be condensed

Repertoire is published 15 months ahead; application is due 9 months ahead (near or on October 15th)

With fewer rounds, and to better approximate the demands of a performing artist, the timeline is condensed. This active timeline also falls within a single academic year.


APPLICATION APPLICATION PROCESS

A complete application packet is mailed to AGO headquarters and consists of the following:

(a) Four copies of the completed application form(b) A check or money order for the application fee(c) Four copies of gov’t issued proof of age(d) Four copies of: information about the applicant’s musical education and competition and prize history; recording verification form; and three to six examples of recital programs demonstrating depth of experience and breadth of repertoire(e) Four copies of an audio CD of LIVE performance presented in the 15 months prior to application

Application due April 15th, odd year; notification of status by June 17th, odd year

Applications and recordings will be submitted online. (a) an application form, which solicits education and prize history(b) proof of age (c) a brief list of notable performances(d) concise, anonymous, online recommendation form(e) digital files of recording Application due October 15th, odd year; notification of status by December 15th, odd year

The application process can be streamlined. Currently, in most cases, applicants are evaluated solely on the submitted anonymous recording. The portfolio of submitted printed material (in quadruplicate) is only consulted following audio evaluation in rare instances of uncertainty regarding a candidate’s viability to be one of 25 “official competitors.” Obviously, materials such as recital programs are not capable of being judged anonymously.


APPLICATION REPERTOIRE

Two works, not exceeding 30 minutes, performed LIVE presented in the 15 months prior to application: 1) any major work by J.S. Bach (all movements of a multimovement work) 2) a contrasting work composed after 1770

FOR ALL ROUNDS: 25%: Fairness demands common repertoire between all competitors65%: There should be a mix of prescribed and free‐choice repertoire7%: Competitors should choose

repertoire within stylistic guidelines

3%: Competitors should choose

repertoire without guidelines

Choose two works, totaling 20–25 minutes, one from each of two lists: 1) one list comprises two or three similar works of Bach (or other German Baroque).2) The other list comprises two or three works similar to each other, but representing a different stylistic era.

All competitors submitting works of similar style and difficulty will allow better comparison in this single recorded round (when the most competitors are to be eliminated).

RECORDED ROUND RECORDED ROUND REPERTOIRE

Prescribed repertoire. In the 2014 cycle, these works are: 1) MARCHAND: Dialogue in C Major2) BACH: Selected portions of “Sei gegrüsset, Jesu gütig,” BWV 7683) REGER: Capriccio, Op. 65, Book I4) REGER: Improvisation, Op. 65, Bk I5) RACHEL LAURIN: “Scherzo” from Symphonie No. 1, Op. 36

This round is discontinued.


GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS DURING LIVE PERFORMANCE ROUNDS ORGAN RESTRICTIONS FOR COMPETITORS

Once notified of their status, those selected to compete in the live performance rounds are prohibited from playing the competition organs in advance of their official practice times.

Same.

ORDER OF PLAY IN LIVE ROUNDS

The order in which the competitors perform will be chosen by lot in each round.

Same.

COMPETITOR PRACTICE TIME

Each semifinalist will receive a minimum of four hours practice time on the Competition instrument. Additional practice time at other venues will also be available as conditions permit. Practice time for the Final Round will be negotiable, as long as each competitor is offered the same amount of time, with a minimum of four hours per finalist. No one other than the competitor, committee members, and designated onsite monitors or page‐turners may be present during practice times.

Each semifinalist will receive a minimum of three hours practice time on the Competition instrument. Additional practice time at other venues will also be available as conditions permit. Practice time for the Final Round will be negotiable, as long as each competitor is offered the same amount of time, with a minimum of three hours per finalist. No one other than the competitor, committee members, and designated onsite monitors or page‐turners may be present during practice times.

Three hours of practice is comparable to other top‐tier competitions. Additionally, as the number of competitors increases, we must be mindful of time required from venues.


PAGE‐TURNERS / REGISTRATION ASSISTANTS

The NYACOP Committee will designate page‐turners, who will be available on the last day of practice. During practice sessions, these page‐turners will also be allowed to play any desired passages for competitors to listen for balance and registrationadjustments. Page‐turners may not offer coaching or advice on registration during practice sessions and will not be allowed to operate stops or pistons during the performance. Competitors may record their practice sessions.

Same.

USE OF PHOTOCOPIED SCORES

The use of illegally reproduced copyrighted scores is prohibited and will disqualify any competitor from further participation in the Competition. Exceptions to this rule apply only to pages duplicated for the purpose of facilitating page turns.

For the purpose of eliminating page turns, competitors may perform from photocopies provided they also bring their original scores and submit them for examination by the NYACOP committee.


AUDIENCE EXPECTATIONS IN LIVE ROUNDS

Applause will be permitted at the conclusion of each competitor’s performance at the Final Round.

SEMI‐FINALS: The audience is expected to remain silent during the duration of a competitor’s program. The audience is invited to applaud at the conclusion of each competitor. FINALS: The audience is permitted to applaud between works, akin to normal performance conditions.

SEMI‐FINAL ROUND

SEMI‐FINALS LOCATION AND TIMING

The Semi‐Finals are held approximately one month ahead of the Final Round. The location of the Semi‐final Round is in no way influenced by the location of the Final Round.

The Semi‐Final Round will be held 3–5 days in advance of the Final Round. The location of the Semi‐Final Round will be within easy driving distance to the Final Round location. For instance, the semi‐finals might be held in Worcester or Providence if the Finals are held in Boston. In Houston, the semi‐finals might be held in an outlying suburb or in a city such as Galveston or Austin.

Having the two rounds adjacent in schedule will allow for easier travel, particularly for competitors traveling a long distance to participate. This might increase participation. Having two rounds back to back is more akin to normal demands on a traveling performing artist. For the AGO, it will reduce travel costs to only one trip, and allow the option of less expensive housing during the semi‐final period. For the Convention Steering Committee, the location of the semi‐finals will be far enough away as to not cause a significant burden on already stretched resources.


This allows opportunity for a quality organ that might not be featured during a convention (because of distance) to be featured.

SEMI‐FINAL ROUND INSTRUMENT

No rubrics.

In choosing a venue for the semi‐final round, a room with acoustical vibrancy is a consideration. The venue should be of sufficient size to accommodate expected attendance. Of course, the organ should be of high quality, good working condition, and with sufficient memory allotment.

The venue for the semi‐final round should be chosen before the official rules are published. The organ specification will be published with the official rules.


SEMI‐FINAL ROUND REPERTOIRE

Prescribed repertoire. In the 2014 cycle, these works are: 1) FRESCOBALDI: Toccata Quinta, Book II2) BACH: Prelude and Fugue in A Minor, BWV 5433) SAINT‐SAËNS: Fantaisie in D‐Flat Major, Op. 1014) EBEN: “The Dance of David before the Ark of the Covenant” from Four Biblical Dances The competitor may play these works in any order.

Three works totaling 30–35 minutes: 1) a choice from a list of three major works of Bach

2) a choice from a list of three works similar to each other, but representing a different stylistic era from the Application Round list

3) one free choice work The performer should consider the tonal design and specification of the semi‐final round instrument when choosing his/her third work. The semi‐finalist will provide the Competitions Committee with their semi‐final and final round programs by February 15, even years. The semi‐final round repertoire may be performed in any order the competitor chooses. The judges will consider the balance of the resulting program in this round.


FINAL ROUND FINALS LOCATION AND TIMING

The Final round is held in conjunction with the biennial AGO National Convention.

The Final round is held in conjunction with the biennial AGO National Convention. The competition Finals should be scheduled at a time that will promote strong attendance by both convention‐goers and the general public.

While we might gain broader public awareness by building media relationships and keeping the competition in one location cycle after cycle, we decided it was ultimately to our benefit as an organization – both financially and otherwise – to keep the final round connected to the biennial National Convention.

FINAL‐ROUND VENUE & INSTRUMENT

No rubrics.

In choosing a venue for the final round, a room with acoustical vibrancy is a paramount consideration. The venue should be of sufficient size to accommodate expected convention attendance plus considerable public attendance. Of course, the organ should be of high quality, good working condition, and with sufficient memory allotment. The venue should be chosen before the official rules are published. The organ specification is to be published with the official rules.


FINAL ROUND REPERTOIRE

Prescribed repertoire. In the 2014 cycle, these works are: 1) BRUHNS: Praeludium in G Major2) BACH: Schmücke dich, BWV 6543) WIDOR: “Moderato cantabile” from Symphonie No. 84) PAMELA DECKER: A new work commissioned for the 2014 convention; scores delivered to semifinalists in early 2014 The competitor may play these works in any order.

A balanced recital of 55–60 minutes, taking the nature of the instrument into account, and including the following: 1) any American score composed within the previous 15 years2) a prescribed collaborative work, to be performed with a provided soloist (vocal or instrumental) Applause from the audience is allowed between works.

ADJUDICATION JUDGES’ SCORES

No rubric.

When legally permissible, the Competitions Committee will provide a binder of photocopied scores to each judge during LIVE rounds, and destroy such photocopies immediately after use.


APPLICATION ROUND JUDGES

The application process is administered by the NYACOP (Competitions) committee. Three (3) members, none of whom may be current teacher to any applicant, evaluate the recordings in strict anonymity. Applicants do not receive comments or feedback from the judges/committee members.

FOR ALL ROUNDS: 35%: Judges should be able to freely discuss the outcome and should not be bound by rubrics or point systems57%: Judging should be less dependent on interpersonal dialogue and incorporate a point system8%: Only a point system should be used

The application recording is evaluated by three (3) judges in strict anonymity.

No judge may be a current teacher of an applicant.

Judges might be drawn from members of the Competitions Committee for this round. The rubric for evaluation will be published with the official rules.

Judges will keep written documentation of their evaluation using the provided rubric; contestants will be provided copies of scores and/or comments.

For this application round, three judges is adequate. With so few judges, anonymity is an attractive option.

RECORDED ROUND JUDGES

The recorded round is judged under conditions of strict anonymity. Judges’ identities are revealed at the conclusion of the round. No judges may be a current or immediate past teacher of a competitor. Competitors receive signed, written comments.

This round is discontinued.


SEMI‐FINAL ROUND JUDGES

Three judges, different from the Recorded Round. Performers are screened from view of the judges. No judge may be a current or immediate past teacher of a competitor. Competitors receive signed, written comments.

FOR ALL ROUNDS: 62%: Having three judges is appropriate35%: Having five judges is more appropriate3%: Having seven judges is most appropriate

Five judges, none of whom served in the Application Round. Judges are screened from viewing the performer. No judge may have taught a competitor in the previous three years. Competitors receive signed, written comments upon completion of the competition round.

Competitors and judges will be given the opportunity to interact following the competition round.

As the stakes for the competitors increase, the number of judges should also increase. We feel some level of anonymity is still required for five judges, yet we also feel that we should have the best judges possible for this live performance round. Therefore, some other restrictions are loosened.


FINAL ROUND JUDGES

Three judges, different from any previous round. Performers are screened from view. No judge may be a current or immediate past teacher of a competitor. Competitors receive signed, written comments. Judges must at name at least a First Prize winner.

Seven judges, none of whom served in a previous round. Two judges may be non‐organists (such as a local music critic, or other experienced listener). No restrictions on a judge’s relationship to any competitor. Simply choose the best judges. The jury reserves the right to withhold any prize.

The jury will provide signed, written comments to the competitors. The winner is determined by vote of the jury. Subsequently, the second prize and then third prizes are determined by vote of the jury. Guidelines are given to the jury, but no point system and no rubric are provided.

To ensure fair adjudication during a public performance, we feel seven judges are necessary.

PRIZE MANDATE

At least First Prize must be awarded. The judges reserve the right to withhold any or all prizes.


FINANCIAL PROVISIONS PRIZES

First Prize: 1. The Lilian Murtagh Memorial Prize, funded by Karen McFarlane Artists Inc., Cleveland, Ohio; $3,000 cash award; career development assistance from Karen McFarlane Artists Inc., between September 2014 and June 2016, including publicity materials and advertising. 2. A performance during the 2016 AGO National Convention. 3. A CD recording on the Pro Organo label. Total value of management and recording services estimated at $20,000. Based on past winners’ experience, recital fees between 2012 and 2014 are estimated to be $20,000 or more before expenses. Second Prize: $3,000, Funded by John‐Paul Buzard Organbuilders Third Prize: $2,000, Funded by Kegg Organbuilders

79%: Prizes are appropriate21%: Prizes are not appropriate

First Prize: 1. Lilian Murtagh Memorial and Jordan Prizes The Lilian Murtagh Memorial Prize, funded by Karen McFarlane Artists Inc., Cleveland, Ohio; $3,000 cash award; career development assistance for two years from Karen McFarlane Artists Inc., including publicity materials and advertising. The Jordan Prize, funded by the Jordan Organ Endowment, $10,000. This prize will be awarded in conjunction with a Gala Solo Recital on the Jordan Family Organ in Columbus, GA. The prize represents the fee for this recital. 2. A performance during the subsequent AGO National Convention 3. A CD recording on the Pro Organo label. Total value of management and recording services estimated at $20,000. Based on past winners’ experience, recital fees between 2012 and 2014 are estimated to be $20,000 or more before expenses.


Audience Prize: $1,000, Funded by Martin Ott Organ Company

4. A selection of recital awards. We will work to identify a selection of venues that will commit to host the winner at normal cost. Included should be at least one venue in each region. 5. A defined amount of TAO and web advertising provided by the AGO. Second Prize: 1. $3,000, Funded by John‐Paul Buzard Organbuilders

2. A selection of recital awards. We will work to identify a selection of venues that will commit to host the second place winner at normal cost.

3. A defined amount of TAO and web advertising provided by the AGO.

Third Prize: 1. $2,000, Funded by Kegg Organbuilders

2. At least one recital award.


Audience Prize: $1,000, Funded by Martin Ott Organ Company


SEMI‐FINALISTS

The AGO will provide round‐trip coach air transportation and housing for competitors in the Semifinal Round as well as a fixed per diem allowance from the first scheduled practice day through the conclusion of the Semifinal Round.

Semi‐finalists will be provided round‐trip coach air transportation, as well as housing and a fixed per diem allowance through the completion of the semi‐final round.

All semi‐finalists will receive complimentary convention registration, and are encouraged to stay for the convention. If an eliminated competitor chooses to leave at the completion of the semi‐final round, he/she will be responsible for any and all resulting fees and fare changes.

FINALISTS

The AGO will provide housing and round‐trip coach air transportation for finalists to the National Convention in Boston, Mass., as well as a fixed per diem allowance from the first scheduled practice day through the day on which the prizes are presented. Finalists are required to attend this presentation.

The AGO will provide housing for finalists as well as a fixed per diem allowance through the day on which the prizes are presented. Prize winners are required to attend this presentation.

JUDGES

The AGO will provide honoraria and expense reimbursement for all judges. Judges for the Final Round receive complimentary AGO convention registration.

Judges will receive a small honorarium.

Judges receive reimbursed convention registration (if not already provided).


ADVERTISING FOR SEMI‐ and FINAL ROUNDS

None.

To generate public interest in the competition and, by extension, our instrument, the AGO and its local competition hosts will budget funds to purchase local advertising in the cities hosting the Semi‐final and Final Rounds of the Competition.

POST COMPETITION RESPONSIBILITIES ONGOING PUBLICITY

None.

The AGO will establish a Winners’ Blog on its website. The First Prize winner will contribute to this blog documenting his/her travels and professional activities. The AGO will publish and promote all prize‐winners’ concerts through its social media mechanisms. The AGO will provide, free of charge, a defined amount of TAO and/or Web advertising to the First, Second, and Third Prize winners of NYACOP during the winners’ period. The AGO will publish an article in TAO, written by, or about, the First Prize Winner in the odd‐year summer following his/her win. This article will serve as an update to membership about his/her activities, and will generate anticipation for the next cycle of the competition.


NCOI | National Competition in Organ Improvisation

Organ improvisation has not, until recently, been a focus of concerted study in our country. Therefore, we recommend that NCOI’s timeline expand significantly – even though NYACOP’s mission, in contrast, encourages a condensed competition timeline. This expanded timeline will allow increased opportunity for practice and preparation, exploration of specific improvisation concepts, and ultimately, a deeper fluency in improvisation performance. Additionally, it will allow for improvisation pedagogy and performance to become a regular and substantive part of regional convention programming.

We aim to integrate the art of improvisation into the everyday language of professional organists, highlighting its inherent connection to the creation and performance of repertoire as well as to its liturgical possibilities.



The National Competition in Organ Improvisation

There were several comments throughout about the alphabet soup that is the AGO. Many members didn’t understand what “NCOI” referred to, even after it was defined.

To be determined.

MISSION STATEMENT

The National Competition in Organ Improvisation seeks to further the art of improvisation by recognizing and rewarding superior performances in the field. A flourishing tradition of improvisation is fundamental to a truly vital musical culture.

43%: Highly successful program44%: Admirable in mission, but success could be greater11%: Admirable in mission, but unsuccessful3%: Unsuccessful and needs new mission

The National Competition in Organ Improvisation seeks to further the art of improvisation by recognizing and rewarding superior performances in the field and by promoting improvisation pedagogy as an integral part of the consummate musician. A flourishing tradition of improvisation is fundamental to a truly vital musical culture.

Recognizing that improvisation pedagogy is not incorporated into many academic organ programs, and is also not a focal part of any AGO education initiative, the pedagogical aspects of NCOI can be strengthened to promote exploration and engagement with this art form.


ELIGIBILITY: Age

No age limit.86%: Being this inclusive is important14%: I prefer an age limit

Up to age 40. (No lower limit)

Similar to our other competitions, we feel NCOI should support developing artists, and not established career musicians. NCOI has a broader age range than NYACOP to accommodate those who first engage improvisation study and practice later in his/her development.


NCOI is open to all regardless of citizenship.

Same.


First‐place winners of previous AGO Improvisation Competitions are not eligible.

Previous NCOI First Place Winners and anyone under artist management by the time of the final round are ineligible.


There is no statement on membership.

All are welcome to compete, regardless of AGO membership. Non‐members will pay a higher application fee and will be encouraged to join.


APPLICATION FEE

$75$75 for AGO members; $125 for non‐members

This fee range encourages AGO membership without being a financial hurdle for non‐members.


NUMBER OF ROUNDS

Application plus three rounds:1. Application Form (no playing)2. Preliminary3. Semi‐final round4. Final round

95%: Three rounds are appropriate3%: There should be fewer rounds2%: There should be more rounds

Same.


Preliminary Round: maximum 15 minutesSubsequent rounds: 25–30 minutes

71%: This is an appropriate amount24%: This is too much music per round2%: This is not enough music per round

Timings for each round’s improvisations are included in the requirements; cumulative timing for each round will be determined in part by the repertoire prescribed.

TYPE OF REPERTOIRE INCLUDED

All rounds consist solely of improvised performance.

The Competition seeks to draw connections between the art of improvisation and: ∙ its historical connections to the development of repertoire,∙ its collaborative possibilities, and∙ its use in service playing.


DELIVERY OF IMPROVISATION THEMES

30 minutes prior to performance. No access to a keyboard.

66%: Receipt of themes 30 minutes prior is appropriate17%: Themes should be delivered sooner5%: Themes should be delivered later11%: Themes should be given at the moment of performance (no preparation) 63%: Competitors should not have access to keyboard once receiving themes for study37%: Competitors should have access to a keyboard during these 30 minutes

Preparation time for each round: Some themes are given 3 days in advance, others are given 30 minutes in advance. Use of keyboard is allowed. Competitors may sketch a contrasting theme, or blueprint for a form, but not compose specific full harmonies. All papers carried to the console will be examined to ensure compliance.

For certain competition components, we recommend allowing more time for improvisation preparation. Indeed, rarely do truly great improvisations simply “fall from the sky.” Instead, the best improvisations form over longer periods of time.

Therefore, while some components retain a 30‐minute preparation allowance (albeit now with access to a keyboard), some components now receive a three‐day preparation allowance. Competitors will receive the themes three days in advance, will be encouraged to live and work with the themes, but will not be allowed to bring any substantive material to the competition console.

STYLISTIC CONSIDERATIONS

NCOI currently seeks to encourage improvisation in many different styles. Some improvisational styles are prescribed in each round, although some rounds also have free improvisations.

76%: It is important competitors be made to improvise in a variety of historical styles24%: All improvisations should be free choice

Competitors are encouraged to explore different historical styles of improvisation, and are given stylistic prototypes from which to draw inspiration.


Semi‐finals: 5 competitorsFinals: 3 competitors

76%: These numbers are appropriate20%: There should be more semi‐finalists

Same.



Rules and expectations are published roughly 12 months ahead of Finals; application due roughly 10 months ahead

22%: This is too long75%: This is appropriate

Rules and expectations are published roughly 24 months ahead of finals; application is due roughly 20 months ahead; Semi‐finals occur during a Regional Convention roughly 12 months ahead of Finals.

An expanded competition timeline allows all competitors time for serious engagement with styles and forms expected for presentation and execution during the competition rounds. Since many competitors will not have had significant formal training in improvisation, this luxury of time enables each the opportunity to explore and practice these concepts. This strengthens the pedagogical value while enabling more players to excel – increasing the quality of the competition as a whole.


A paper application, outlining a candidate’s past improvisation study, is submitted to AGO headquarters. The candidate also submits contact details for his/her chosen Preliminary Round proctor (who will deliver themes and record the preliminary round). The application is used only for information gathering; it is not evaluated.

Applications are submitted online. Applications include past repertoire and improvisation study. Competitors submit contact details for their designated Preliminary Round proctor. The application is used only for information acquisition; it is not evaluated. Application due on or near Oct. 30.


PRELIMINARY ROUND PRELIMINARY ROUND REPERTOIRE

1. An improvisation on a given cantus firmus that includes a harmonization of the tune and an improvisation on the tune. 2. An improvisation on a given free theme. Total maximum time: 15 minutes

76%: It is important that competitors be made to improvise in a variety of historical styles24%: All improvisations should be free choice

1. REPERTOIRE: Perform a Bach Fantasia or a North German Baroque extensive Praeludium or Chorale Fantasia that likely was an improvisation originally; later composed for improvisation pedagogical purposes.

Competitor will choose a work from a provided list. 2. Realize a given thoroughbass. (30 minutes preparation) 3. Improvise two contrasting harmonizations of a given cantus firmus: one with soprano solo, one with tenor (LH) or bass (pedal) solo. (30 minutes preparation) 4. Improvise five contrasting variations on a given theme. (3 days preparation) [Give 2 prototypes, i.e. Duruflé Veni Creator variations; Böhm Freu dich sehr variations].

6–10 minute improvisation

Competitors will receive one 30 minute preparation period for both tasks.

The 3‐day preparation themes will be delivered to all proctors and

1) Throughout the rounds of this competition, we seek to highlight the inseparable connection of improvisation and repertoire; a connection often disregarded in today’s climate of specialization. Indeed, improvisation has always led to the notation of repertoire, and repertoire has always influenced the genesis of improvisation.

To that end, we incorporate a repertoire‐playing component into each round of the competition. We believe a strong improviser should also demonstrate skills as a thoughtful and accomplished interpreter of repertoire.

2) In addition to developing the art of long‐form improvisation (as this competition has primarily done in the past), we also seek to cultivate skills necessary for many practicing organists. To that end, hymn‐playing and continuo components are recommended additions to the competition.

3) We recommend structuring improvisation requirements around expectations with regards to musical form rather than historically stylistic mandates. While we believe a strong


competitors simultaneously via email at a previously stated time.

Competitors pledge to work independently, without coaching or other help, during the 3‐day preparation period.

improviser will be conversant in a variety of historical styles, we also believe that the art of improvisation is influenced strongly by a specific instrument and setting. The competitor is encouraged improvise in a style he or she feels most appropriate to a setting; he or she will then be judged on the success of execution.

PROCTOR RESPONSIBILITIES

• Attend the entire recording session, with no other audience members permitted except a recording engineer. • Make sure all recording equipment is working properly with a brief trial recording before giving the themes to the competitor. •Receive the themes and proctor’s form from the competition administrator and give them to the competitor 30 minutes before the recording session begins. The competitor may not play the organ or any other instrument after receiving the themes and before recording the improvisations. • Ensure that the CD is high‐quality, continuous, unedited, and free from background noise or other imperfections that would impair its

• Attend the entire recording session, with no other audience members permitted except a recording engineer. • Make sure all recording equipment is working properly with a brief trial recording before giving the themes to the competitor. •Receive the themes and proctor’s form from the competition administrator and give them to the competitor 30 minutes before the recording session begins. The competitor will have access to the organ during this time. • Ensure that the recording is high‐quality, continuous, unedited, and free from background noise or other imperfections that would impair its effectiveness.


effectiveness. • Verify that all four CDs are properly labeled as instructed by the administrator and playable on standard playback equipment. • Send the recordings, proctor’s form, and themes to AGO Headquarters. The proctor’s form will certify that the recording session was properly monitored and that the recording’s quality and playability have been confirmed.

• Verify that the recording is properly labeled as instructed by the administrator. • Send the recordings, proctor’s form, and themes to AGO Headquarters. The proctor’s form will certify that the recording session was properly monitored and that the recording’s quality and playability have been confirmed.

GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS DURING LIVE PERFORMANCE ROUNDS ORGAN RESTRICTIONS FOR COMPETITORS

All competitors must avoid the competition site outside of the appointed orientation, practice, and performance times, except for official AGO convention events.

Same.


The order in which the competitors perform will be chosen by lot in each round.

Same.



Each competitor will receive no less than three hours of practice time on the competition instrument in the days preceding the round. Each competitor will practice alone. Except for an NCOI Committee‐approved person who may demonstrate combinations of the competitor’s choice and/or provide registration assistance on instruments with no pistons, no one may listen to or accompany the competitor during practice sessions.

Same.


No rubric.

For notated repertoire, the Competitions Committee will designate page‐turners, who will be available on the last day of practice. During practice sessions, these page‐turners will also be allowed to play any desired passages for competitors to listen for balance and registration adjustments. Page‐turners may not offer coaching or advice on registration during practice sessions and, except in cases of mechanical stop action, may not offer registration assistance. Competitors may record their practice sessions.



No rubric.

For notated repertoire, for the purpose of eliminating page turns, competitors may perform from photocopies provided they also bring their original scores and submit them for examination by the Competitions Committee.


Applause will be permitted at the conclusion of each competitor’s performance at the Final Round.

SEMI‐FINALS: The audience is expected to remain silent during the duration of a competitor’s program. The audience is invited to applaud at the conclusion of each competitor. FINALS: The audience is permitted to applaud between works.


SEMI‐FINAL ROUND SEMI‐FINALS LOCATION AND TIMING

The semi‐finals are held 3–5 days prior to the Final round, usually in the same venue as the Final round.

The semi‐final round will be held in conjunction with one AGO Regional Convention, roughly 12 months ahead of the Final Round.

The primary reason for this recommendation is pedagogical: more time to practice focused and distinct improvisation skills (not usually ingrained in academically‐trained organists) will yield much stronger results at the end. Additionally, it will offer the opportunity to have a strong improvisation track at a Regional Convention, something currently absent from many Regional programs.

SEMI‐FINAL ROUND INSTRUMENT

No rubrics.

3%: Mechanical Action9%: Electro‐pneumatic Action35%: Use both within scope of competition54%: Choose the best available, regardless of type

In choosing a venue for the semi‐final round, a room with acoustical vibrancy is a consideration. The venue should be of sufficient size to accommodate expected convention attendance plus public attendance. Of course, the organ should be of high quality, good working condition, and with sufficient memory allotment (if appropriate). The venue should be chosen before the official rules are published, which should include the organ specification.


SEMI‐FINAL ROUND REPERTOIRE

1. Historically inspired improvisation based on one hymn melody, chorale tune, or plainsong. This may be a single‐movement improvisation (chorale fantasy); no fewer than four versets in the manner of Scheidemann or Weckmann; a partita à la Böhm, Pachelbel, or Bach; or plainsong verses including Plein Jeu, Fugue, a third movement of the competitor’s choice, and a Dialogue sur les Grands Jeux in the manner of Couperin, Clérambault, or Grigny.The competitor will indicate his or her choice to the proctor prior to the improvisation, and the proctor will announce the choice to the judges and audience. [15‐minute time limit] 2. Improvisation on one of the given free themes, or on one given free theme and a secondary theme of the contestant’s choosing. [10‐minute time limit] The total maximum performance time is 27 minutes, during which time competitors may pause for no more than two minutes between the improvisations.

1. REPERTOIRE: Perform one movement of a symphonic composition that was originally improvised (i.e. Tournemire, Eben) AND a contrasting movement of a Messiaen work. Competitors will choose each work from a provided list. 2. Lead congregational singing of a hymn/Psalm/chant tune. Creative introduction + 4 stanzas. Offer at least two contrasting harmonizations of a previously given cantus firmus: one with soprano solo, one with tenor (LH) or bass (pedal) solo, and creative text painting. (3 days preparation) 3. Improvise a lyrical Adagio based on a given theme (30 minutes preparation) [Offer prototypes, i.e. Widor Andante sostenuto or Bach TAF Adagio] 3–6 minutes 4. Improvise a Prelude, Toccata, or Fantasia on a given theme. (3 days preparation) [Offer prototypes, i.e. Dupré Prelude, Bach Fantasia, Widor Toccata] 4–7 minutes


FINAL ROUND FINALS LOCATION AND TIMING

The Final round is held in conjunction with the biennial AGO National Convention.

Same. The competition Finals should be scheduled at a time that will promote strong attendance by both convention‐goers and the general public.

FINAL‐ROUND VENUE & INSTRUMENT

No rubrics.

3%: Mechanical Action9%: Electro‐pneumatic Action35%: Use both within scope of competition54%: Choose the best available, regardless of type

In choosing a venue for the final round, a room with acoustical vibrancy is a paramount consideration. The venue should be of sufficient size to accommodate expected convention attendance plus considerable public attendance. Of course, the organ should be of high quality, good working condition, and with sufficient memory allotment (if appropriate). The venue should be chosen before the official rules are published, which should include the organ specification.


FINAL ROUND REPERTOIRE

1. Prelude, fantasia, or toccata and a fugue based on given theme(s), which may be sacred or secular. [15‐minute time limit] 2. Free improvisation based on a given musical theme or a given non‐musical theme (literary passage or artwork). The competitor will indicate his or her choice to the proctor prior to the improvisation, and the proctor will announce the choice to the judges and audience. [10‐minute time limit] The total maximum performance time is 27 minutes, during which time competitors may pause for no more than two minutes between the improvisations.

1. REPERTOIRE: Perform a technically challenging American work composed in the past 15 years.

This work is the competitor’s choice. Maximum 10 minutes.

2. Realize a thoroughbass in collaboration with a soloist. (3 days preparation) c. 10 minutes

3. Lead congregational singing of a hymn/Psalm/chant tune. Creative introduction + 4 stanzas. Offer at least two contrasting harmonizations of a given cantus firmus: one with soprano solo, one with tenor (LH) or bass (pedal) solo, and creative text painting. (30 minutes preparation)

4. Improvise a four‐movement Sonata or Symphony on given themes. The movements expected will be delineated in the rules. (3 days preparation) [Offer prototypes] 20 minutes maximum


ADJUDICATION JUDGES’ REPERTOIRE SCORES

n/a

When legally permissible, the Competitions Committee will provide a binder of photocopied scores to each judge during LIVE rounds, and destroy such photocopies immediately after use.

PRELIMINARY ROUND JUDGES

The preliminary round is by recording, evaluated by a panel of three judges.

The application recording is evaluated by three judges in strict anonymity.

No judge may be a current teacher of an applicant.

Judges might be drawn from members of the Competitions Committee for this round. The rubric for evaluation will be published with the official rules.

Judges will keep written documentation of their evaluation using the provided rubric; contestants will be provided copies of scores and/or comments.

For this application round, three judges is adequate. With so few judges, anonymity is an attractive option.


SEMI‐FINAL ROUND JUDGES

A panel of three judges, none of whom will have served as a judge for the Preliminary Round,will serve for both the Semifinal and Final Rounds. Judges will be screened from the competitors, and no applause will be allowed. Any communication, direct or indirect, between a competitor and a judge before the competition has concluded will result in the immediate disqualification of the competitor involved.

64%: Fairness concerns demand blind judging23%: Open to non‐blind judging13%: Competitors should not be shielded from judges

66%: NCOI judges should have no relationship with any competitor34%: Explore possibilities to enable judges to serve regardless of relationships with competitors

83%: Three judges are adequate17%: Three judges are not adequate

Five judges, none of whom served in the Application Round. Judges are screened from viewing the performer. Point system incorporated with judging criteria clearly delineated to judges and competitors well in advance. Judges may have a relationship with competitor, but may not have regularly taught a competitor in the previous three years. Competitors receive signed, written comments. Competitors and judges will be given the opportunity to interact following the competition round.

As the stakes for the competitors increase, the number of judges should also increase. We feel some level of anonymity is still required for five judges, yet we also feel that we should have the best judges possible for this live performance round. Therefore, some other restrictions are loosened.


FINAL ROUND JUDGES

Identical rubric and identical judges to the semi‐final round above.

41%: NCOI judges should deliberate together 52%: NCOI should explore a system less dependent on interpersonal dialogue7%: There should be no conversational deliberation.

Seven judges, none of whom served in a previous round. Two judges may be non‐organists (such as a local music critic, or other experienced listener) No restrictions on a judge’s relationship to any competitor. Simply choose the best judges. The jury reserves the right to withhold any prize.

The jury will provide signed, written comments to the competitors. The winner is determined by vote of the jury. Subsequently, the second prize and then third prizes are determined by vote of the jury. Guidelines are given to the jury, but no point system and no rubric are provided.

To ensure fair adjudication during a public performance, we feel seven judges are necessary.


JUDGING CRITERIA

The judges’ criteria for performance evaluation in all three rounds shall emphasize: • Thematic use and development. Development of portions of the theme is acceptable. • Harmonic integrity. • Clear presentation of form. • Timing as appropriate to style, form, development, and contrast. • Stylistic consistency. • Rhythmic integrity and interest. • Intentional direction and melodic/linear contour. • Effective use of the instrument, e.g., registration, range, texture. • Sophisticated use of imitative counterpoint.

Same.

PRIZE MANDATE

None. The judges reserve the right to withhold any or all prizes.


FINANCIAL PROVISIONS PRIZES

First Prize: 1. $3,000, provided by McNeil Robinson.2. A performance during the subsequent AGO National Convention Second Prize: $2,000, provided by Dobson Pipe Organ Builders. Third Prize: $1,500, provided by Pamela and Steven Ruiter‐Feenstra Audience Prize: $1,500, provided by Robin and David Arcus

80%: These prizes are appropriate20%: These prizes are not appropriate

First Prize: 1. Same? 2. A CD?

3. A performance during the subsequent AGO National Convention 4. A selection of recital awards. We will work to identify a selection of venues that will commit to host the winner at normal cost. 5. A defined amount of TAO and web advertising provided by the AGO. Second Prize: 1. Same?

2. A selection of recital awards. We will work to identify a selection of venues that will commit to host the second place winner at normal cost.


Third Prize: 1. Same?

Raising the professional value (as well as cash value) of first prize will generate a stronger and more committed applicant pool, encouraging competitors to engage improvisation seriously.


2. At least one recital award.


Audience Prize:

Same?

SEMI‐FINALISTS

The AGO will provide round‐trip coach air transportation and housing for competitors in the Semifinal Round as well as a fixed per diem allowance from the first scheduled practice day through the conclusion of the Semifinal Round.

Semi‐finalists will be provided round‐trip coach air transportation, as well as housing and a fixed per diem allowance through the completion of the semi‐final round. All semi‐finalists will receive complimentary regional convention registration, and are encouraged to attend the convention.

FINALISTS

The AGO will provide housing and round‐trip coach air transportation for each finalist to attend the National Convention.

The AGO will provide housing and round‐trip coach air for finalists to the National Convention, as well as a fixed per diem allowance from the first scheduled practice day through the day on which the prizes are presented. Prize winners are required to attend this presentation.All finalists receive complimentary convention registration.


JUDGES

The AGO will provide honoraria and expense reimbursement for all judges. Judges for the Final Round receive complimentary AGO convention registration.

Judges will receive a small honorarium.

Judges receive reimbursed convention registration (if not already provided).

ADVERTISING FOR SEMI‐ and FINAL ROUNDS

None.

To generate public interest in the competition and, by extension, our instrument, the AGO will budget funds to purchase local advertising in the cities hosting the Semi‐final and Final Rounds of the Competition.



None.

The AGO will establish an NCOI Winners’ Blog on its website. The First Prize winner will be expected to contribute to this blog documenting his/her travels and professional activities. The AGO will publish and promote all prize‐winners’ concerts through its social media mechanisms. The AGO will provide, free of charge, a defined amount of advertising to the First, Second, and Third Prize winners of NCOI during the winners’ period. The AGO will publish an article in TAO, written by, or about, the First Prize Winner in the odd‐year summer following his/her win. This article will serve as an update to membership about his/her activities, and will generate anticipation for the next cycle of the competition.


RCYO | AGO/Quimby Regional Competitions for Young Organists

The AGO/Quimby Regional Competitions represent a vibrant and successful program of the Guild, supporting the youngest organists in their professional development.

Our committee recommends mostly administrative changes to this competition; some changes in repertoire are also suggested to better reflect the high level of proficiency displayed by many competitors.

We recommend appointing a Regional Competitions Coordinator, who will oversee management and progress of RCYO through successive cycles in each region.



The AGO/Quimby Regional Competitions for Young Organists (RCYO)

Same.

MISSION STATEMENT

The purpose of these competitions is to encourage younger organists to pursue excellence, to gain performance experience, and to receive recognition for their achievements.

62%: Highly successful in mission31%: Admirable in mission, but success could be higher5%: Admirable in mission, but generally unsuccessful2%: Unsuccessful and needs new mission

Same.

ELIGIBILITY: Age

Must not have reached 24th birthday by August 1st, odd year (Regional Round)

86%: Age range is appropriate14%: Age range should include older performers

Same.



No rubric. Same.


A competitor must enter only in the AGO region of either the school at which the competitor is currently enrolled OR the competitor’s permanent legal residence. No competitor may enter more than one Chapter Competition during the competition period. Past first‐place Regional Competition winners are ineligible to compete.

Same.


Membership in the AGO is not required.

AGO Membership is not required.


MINORS

A competitor who is under the age of 18 at the time of the competition must be accompanied by a parent or responsible adult. The Chapter is not responsible for any expenses for the accompanying adult.

Same.

The AGO will take necessary steps to ensure adults who interact with minors have appropriate background screening.


APPLICATION FEE

$50 (payable to the chapter, not National)

Same.

REGIONAL COMPETITION COORDINATOR

Currently none. These tasks are largely handled by the Regional Councillor.

We will encourage each Regional Councillor to appoint a Regional Competition Coordinator. The Regional Competition Coordinator will work with chapters to identify chapters to host chapter competitions, and will serve as a liaison to 1) each chapter as it plans and executes its competition and 2) the regional convention steering committee.

We feel each region needs a dedicated competition coordinator to liaise with chapters and the regional convention steering committee. This competition coordinator might be the Regional Education Coordinator. The competition coordinator, serving over several competition cycles, will be a vital source of continuity and information to chapter organizers, communicating best practices and helping to establish processes that work in each local scenario.

NUMBER OF ROUNDS

Two Rounds: 1. Chapter Level2. Regional Level

92%: Two rounds are adequate2%: There should only be one round6%: There should be more than two rounds

Same.

NUMBER OF CHAPTER COMPETITIONS IN EACH REGION

Maximum of six. Same.



Chapter level: not specified Regional level: maximum of 6

Same.


Identical Rounds; maximum of 40 minutes.

74% This is an appropriate amount of repertoire25%: This is too much music1%: This is not enough music

Chapter Level: 40 minutes maximumRegional Level: 50 minutes maximum

Given the high level of accomplishment demonstrated by RCYO competitors in recent years, it is appropriate that an additional selection of repertoire be included in the culminating round.


1) Rules are published roughly 12 months ahead of Regional (Final) round. 2) Chapter applications to host a chapter competition are due roughly 9 months ahead. 3) Competitor applications are due roughly 6 months ahead. 4) Chapter competitions occur within a 6‐week window roughly 4 months ahead. 5) Regional Competitions occur in conjunction with the Regional Conventions.

18%: Twelve months is too long32%: Repertoire should be announced this early, but the performance rounds should be more compact50%: The current timeline is appropriate

1) Chapters to host chapter‐level competitions are identified roughly 15 months ahead of Regional Competition (spring of previous year) 2) Rules, including chapter competition sites, are published roughly 12 months ahead. 3) Competitor applications are due roughly 8 months ahead. 4) Chapter competitions occur over a 6‐week window roughly 5 months ahead. 5) Regional Competitions occur in conjunction with the Regional conventions.

The timeline currently begins too late. 1) Chapters to host the chapter competitions should be identified by the Regional Competition Coordinator in the spring of the previous year, allowing chapters to adequately plan and budget for the competition’s inclusion in its subsequent programmatic year. 2) The chapters to host competitions will be published with the official rules, allowing competitors the opportunity to better plan. 3) Earlier submission of applications will allow chapter organizers more time to organize the competition ‐‐


particularly for the challenging tasks of choosing an instrument unfamiliar to competitors and judges unfamiliar to competitors. 4) Chapter competitions can be scheduled earlier in the winter, allowing for possibilities over students’ winter break. This earlier window also allows for increased planning time at the regional competition site.


An application packet form is mailed to National Headquarters containing: 1) Competitor details (name, address, etc)2) Competitor’s current and past teachers3) Chosen competition repertoire4) Application fee5) Proof of age6) Documentation showing eligibility to compete in this region The Competitor’s biography and headshot are emailed to National Headquarters.

Applications will be submitted online, and will contain: 1) Competitor details (name, address, etc)2) Competitor’s current and past teachers3) Chosen repertoire for Chapter round4) Application fee5) Proof of age6) Documentation showing eligibility to compete in this region.7) Biography8) Headshot


GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS DURING LIVE PERFORMANCE ROUNDS INSTRUMENT CHOICE

It is imperative that the organ chosen for the competition be adequate to play a wide range of literature and that it be in excellent working condition. This instrument should be the best available, one that projects well into the room and encourages the most sensitive playing. It must have a reliable combination action, preferably with multiple levels of memory.

Same.

ORGAN RESTRICTIONS FOR COMPETITORS

The chosen instrument must be one no competitor uses regularly.

The chosen instrument must be one no competitor uses regularly. Once notified of the competition instrument, the competitor should not play the instrument until the official practice times.


No rubric. The order in which the competitors perform will be chosen by lot in each round.


SINGLE COMPETITOR

If only one competitor has registered for a Chapter Competition, the competitor must still perform for a panel of three judges to be approved as a competitor in the Regional Competition.

Same.


A minimum of three hours of practice on the competition instrument must be arranged by the Competition Coordinator for each competitor. Competitors may be given additional practice time, to be divided equally among all competitors. In addition, each competitor must be allowed at least 30 minutes on the competition instrument on the day of the competition. Competitors may not listen to each other practice. Practice time is typically scheduled during the three to four days immediately preceding the competition. Competitors should plan to make themselves available during the day on whichever day they are assigned. In every situation, the Coordinator must be fair and equitable to all competitors and should make every effort to accommodate the

Same.


competitors’ schedules within reason.


The Competition Coordinator will assign each competitor a page turner/assistant. The page turner/assistant must be a neutral party; the competitor is not allowed to choose a page turner/assistant. The page turner/assistant may demonstrate registrations for the competitor during the practice period, but is prohibited from advising the competitor in any way. Only the page turner/assistant and the official Competition monitor may be present with the competitor during practice sessions. The page turner/assistant may not assist or advise the competitor in any way during the performance except for turning pages.

Same.


The use of photocopies of scores in public domain (copyright before 1923) is acceptable. The use of photocopied or other illegally reproduced copyrighted scores without the written permission of the copyright holder is prohibited and will disqualify a competitor from participation in the competition. Exceptions to this rule apply only to

For the purpose of eliminating page turns, competitors may perform from photocopies provided they also bring their original scores and submit them for examination by the Competitions Committee.

This rule should be consistent with NYACOP and NCOI.


reductions for performance and to pages duplicated for the purpose of facilitating page turns.


Applause is not permitted during the competition.

Applause is permitted at the conclusion of each competitor’s program.

CHAPTER LEVEL ROUND CHAPTER ROUND TIMING

The Chapter level competitions will be held within a six‐week window, roughly four months ahead of the Regional Convention.

35%: The current system of advancing from the chapter level to the regional level is appropriate65%: Explore a system that aims to identify the best competitors in each region instead of being bound by chapter advancement

The Chapter level competitions will be held within a six‐week window, roughly five months ahead of the Regional Convention. The Chapter level competition will be scheduled at a time that enables broad public attendance, such as a weekend or evening.


CHAPTER LEVEL REPERTOIRE

Competitors will perform one work from each of the following categories: 1. A prelude (a toccata or fantasia is acceptable) and fugue or two contrasting movements of a Trio Sonata by Bach. BWV 582 is acceptable; BWV 553–560 and 572 are not acceptable. 2. A work by a composer born between 1800 and 1890 (a single movement of a larger work is acceptable). 3. A work composed by a composer born after 1890 (a single movement of a larger work is acceptable). The works in categories 2 and 3 must be contrasting in mood. 4. Hymns—choose one: O Sacred Head, Now WoundedJesus Christ Is Risen TodayWhat Wondrous Love Is This The competitor will introduce the hymn and play two stanzas as if accompanying a congregation. The first stanza of the hymn must be played from the version downloaded from www.agohq.org. Published or improvised arrangements may be used for the introduction and/or

46%: Fairness demands common repertoire among all performers51%: Competitors should have stylistic requirements rather than prescribed works4%: Competitors should choose their own repertoire without stylistic restrictions

Competitors will perform one work from each of the following categories: 1. A prelude (a toccata or fantasia is acceptable) and fugue or two contrasting movements of a Trio Sonata by Bach. BWV 582 is acceptable; BWV 553–560 and 572 are not acceptable. 2. A prescribed American work of moderate difficulty. 3. A contrasting work of the competitor’s choice. 4. One hymn (chosen off a list) to be played in its entirety (with introduction), with the assembly singing along. At least the first stanza of the hymn must be played from the version downloaded from www.agohq.org. Three or four stanzas will be sung. Published or improvised arrangements may be used for the introduction and/or other stanzas if the competitor wishes. The selections may be performed in any order. Maximum performance time, including time between pieces, is 40 minutes.


other stanza if the competitor wishes.

REGIONAL ROUND LOCATION AND TIMING

The Regional level competition will be held in conjunction with the Regional AGO Convention.

Same. The competition should be scheduled at a time that will promote strong attendance by both convention‐goers and the general public.

REGIONAL ROUND REPERTOIRE

Same as in Chapter Round.

The competitor retains the three repertoire selections from the chapter level round. The competitor additionally includes a fourth selection of repertoire of his/her choice. In choosing this work, the competitor should keep in mind the balance of the program. The competitor chooses and performs a hymn (in similar fashion to the Chapter Level Round). This hymn is different from the Chapter Level hymn. The selections may be performed in any order. The judges will take into consideration the balance of the


program. Maximum performance time, including time between pieces, is 50 minutes.

ADJUDICATION JUDGES’ SCORES

The competitor is responsible for providing three original copies of each score for the judges. (http://www.agohq.org/competitions/rcyo‐pdf/FINDING_MUSIC_SCORES_FOR_RCYO.pdf)

When legally permissible, the Competition Coordinator will provide a binder of photocopied scores to each judge during LIVE rounds, and destroy such photocopies immediately after use.

SCREENING THE COMPETITORS

Competitors must be screened from the view of the judges, but may be visible to the audience.

67%: Fairness demands blind competition22%: Blind might be most fair, but ‘performance’ demands a visual and communicative experience11%: Visibility is crucial and competitors should not be shielded

Same.


CHAPTER ROUND JUDGES

Three judges and two alternates will be appointed in consultation among the Dean of the Chapter, the Program Coordinator (or Sub‐dean), and the Competition Coordinator. If any of these parties has a student who is a competitor, he or she cannot be a judge. These potential judges should be highly knowledgeable with regard to organ literature and performance practice. It may be desirable to appoint judges from other chapters. The names of the five appointees must be reported to the Councillor for the Region at least 25 days prior to the date of the Chapter Competition. b. No past or present teacher of a competitor, or any other teacher associated with a school attended by a competitor, may serve as a judge of that competitor. It is therefore imperative that no judges be appointed until the competitors, their teachers, and their schools are known. c. The names of the judges will not be made public until the conclusion of the competition.

71%: No substantive relationship between judges and competitors29%: Explore possibilities to serve as judges regardless of relationships with competitors

91%: Three judges are adequate9%: Three judges are not adequate

Same.


REGIONAL ROUND JUDGES

a. Three judges and two alternates will be appointed no later than May 31, 2013, in consultation among the Councillor for the Region, the Regional Convention Coordinator, and the Regional Competition Coordinator. If any of these parties has a student who is a competitor, he or she cannot be a judge. These judges should be highly knowledgeable with regard to organ literature and performance practice. b. Neither the Councillor for the Region, the Regional Convention Coordinator, nor the Regional Competition Coordinator may serve as a judge in his or her own Region. c. Neither judges nor Coordinators of Chapter Competitions may serve as judges of a Regional Competition in the same Region. d. No past or present teacher of a competitor, or any other teacher associated with a school attended by a competitor, may serve as a judge of that competitor. It is therefore imperative that no judges be appointed until the competitors, their teachers, and their schools are known. e. The names of the judges will not

Same, although the appointment of Regional judges should be made no later than May 1st.


be made public until the conclusion of the competition.

PRIZE MANDATE

The judges reserve the right to withhold either prize.

Same.

FINANCIAL PROVISIONS CHAPTER ROUND PRIZES

The Chapter is expected to make cash awards to the first and second‐place winners of the competition and to assist the winner in covering the expenses of traveling to the Regional Convention. The Chapter is also encouraged to present the winner in recital. Chapter prizes vary wildly in cash value. The first‐place winner receives free membership in the AGO for one year.

Same.

A recommended minimum chapter level prize is $200 First Prize; $100 Second Prize.


REGIONAL ROUND PRIZES

a. Each Region will award a $1,000 cash prize to the first‐place winner and a $500 cash prize to the second‐place winner of the Regional Competition. These awards are made possible by a generous grant from Michael Quimby, President, Quimby Pipe Organs Inc. b. The first‐place winner will be invited to perform a 45‐minute recital during the Regional Convention. It is recommended that this program include the winner’s competition pieces. In the event the first‐place winner cannot perform, the second‐place winner will be invited to play. c. The winner of each Regional Competition will be invited to perform at the 2014 National Convention in Boston, Mass. In the event the first‐place winner cannot perform, the second place winner will be invited to play. d. Winners will be featured in THE AMERICAN ORGANIST.

78%: Prizes are appropriate22%: Prizes are not appropriate Same.


CHAPTER FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITIES

a. Chapter will retain the application fees collected from the competitors for the purpose of defraying expenses related to the Chapter Competition. b. The Chapter is responsible for any charges imposed for the use of facilities. c. The Chapter must pay each judge a minimum $50 honorarium and provide overnight lodging/meals as necessary.

It is recommended that chapters provide judges’ expenses, but no honorarium is required.

Most chapters have only a small budget to support the competition; honoraria for judges are not necessary at the chapter level.

REGIONAL FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITIES

a. Regional Conventions will provide competitors with housing (use of the convention hotel is strongly recommended), meals, parking, and local transportation during the rehearsal and competition period. The first‐place winner will also receive housing and meals (a per diem of at least $35 for meals is recommended) during the convention as determined by the Convention Steering Committee. Complimentary convention registrations will be provided to at all competitors. b. Expenses incurred in conducting the Regional Competition are the

Same judges honoraria. It is recommended that regional convention committees explore options to provide housing and convention attendance for the eliminated competitors.

For competitors, two of the greatest benefits of participating in a competition are meeting new colleagues and hearing peer performers. Additionally, a competitor benefits from establishing relationships with judges and other professional leaders, and from hearing the many top‐tier performances often presented in conjunction with a competition.

Each of these benefits for an RCYO regional competitor is diminished if he/she does not actually attend the regional convention once the competition is complete.


responsibility of the Chapter hosting the Regional Convention as part of the convention budget. In drafting a budget, it is recommended that the convention plan on six competitors. c. Each judge shall receive a $100 honorarium if there are one or two competitors, plus $25 for each additional competitor over two, along with complimentary convention registration (excluding banquets, transportation, etc.), to be paid by theRegional Convention. If the competition is held prior to the convention, the Regional Convention will also cover lodging and meal expenses incurred by out‐of‐town judges from the time they are required to arrive for the competition until the convention begins, unless those expenses are already provided by the convention for other reasons.

We should identify ways to ensure non‐winners have the ability to attend the regional convention. Many competitors currently do not attend solely because the cumulative cost is prohibitive.



None

Chapters throughout a winner’s region are encouraged to present the Regional Winner in recital.

The Region’s subsequent POE is encouraged to include the Regional Winner in its programming or activities, as appropriate to the winner’s age and experience.

Chapters throughout the region are encouraged to profile or interview the winner for their newsletters and other communications, involving him/her in chapter programming when appropriate.

report & recommendations national … & recommendations | national performance competitions...

Documents