In the past 4 years as a professional quartet, and the previous 17 years as a student cellist, I've had a lot of experience in competitions. Every young student talks about "he/she won Tchaikovsky in 19XX" or "Have you entered XXX competition " The first thing prominently featured in the bios of many young performers is the list of competitions that they have triumphed in. At the same time, the bios of performers like Yo-Yo Ma (heard of him ) or the Takacs and Emerson Quartet rarely, if ever, mention competitions they have entered and won, although all three have won major awards.
So, do they really matter ...
In the past 4 years as a professional quartet, and the previous 17 years as a student cellist, I've had a lot of experience in competitions. Every young student talks about "he/she won Tchaikovsky in 19XX" or "Have you entered XXX competition " The first thing prominently featured in the bios of many young performers is the list of competitions that they have triumphed in. At the same time, the bios of performers like Yo-Yo Ma (heard of him ) or the Takacs and Emerson Quartet rarely, if ever, mention competitions they have entered and won, although all three have won major awards.
So, do they really matter Over the years, I've entered and "lost" my fair share, as well as winning a few along the way. Ultimately, as we prepare to send off applications for major international string quartet competitions happening this summer, the question has come up. How important is a competition win in the career of a young string quartet today
One of our managers has a strong opinion that they really don't make much difference in the long-term career of a quartet, and we really shouldn't bother. Most presenters have never heard of European competitions, and won't book a quartet just because they won some competition across the pond.
On the other hand, our other manager has seen that quartets who win a competition get a major career boost right off the bat, but that the boon in concerts lasts for only one year, maybe two, but ultimately it can prove to be the launching point. I tend to agree with this. Browsing quartet websites (including ours), there is a direct link between the competitions won and the volume of concerts in a quartet's season, if the group is young enough to get reviews as a "young quartet."
So, are they important Yes. However, in the words of my father, who is a scientist by trade, "Correlation does not always imply causation." For the confused, this means that just because the quartets who win competitions have more concerts does not necessarily mean they have these concerts because they won. On the contrary, I believe that quartets and individuals who do the work necessary to play at the level it takes to win a competition do something special in the <em>preparation</em> for the competition. By the time the winner's tour comes around, it's the work that has really done something. The same is true of quartets who have made a recording. The intense work it takes to hone a well-prepared piece to the next level is mandatory in a recording - you can hear all the flaws in the equivalent of technicolor.
When I go to a concert, I listen to the music, and the level is secondary. A great performance with convincing passion can make me forget or even miss even large mistakes. Even some of my favorite recording have glaring flaws in ensemble (think Rostropovich with the Berlin Philharmonic and Karajan in the '60s) but possess something that transcends technique.
We are hoping to "win" competitions this year in a different light. The improvement to our quartet vision, and our individual execution of that vision that is in the preparation for a competition takes on an immediacy that has profound significance. If we win a prize and get to show this to audiences, that will not hurt, but it is always good for me and I think for anyone to remember that "correlation does not always imply causation!" especially in the music business.
