Alright. I think this counts as a Swallowing Our Pride moment.
eighth blackbird announced its new composition competition (creatively named “eighth blackbird composition competition”) in early February. The initial response was positive, with enthusiastic online notices and a few very early entries, but we did start to get hammered in some quarters for our comp comp’s rules and regulations. These negative reactions surprised us, but on reflection we feel that some of the criticism was deserved. In the strine-tinged words of Kevin Rudd, Australia’s illustrious current Prime Minister, “fair cop, mate.”
In response to the many constructive and informative comments we’ve received, we have decided to postpone the competition.
8bb remains committed to the original intent of the competition – to discover, recognize and perform/record an undiscovered compositional gem – and we will relaunch the whole shebang by June. In the meantime, we’ll be on the hunt for the best way to create an event that is awesome for all involved. Any works that are currently being written will remain eligible for the relaunched competition, and any application money already submitted will of course be refunded.
In the meantime, feel free to let us know your thoughts about your perfect, utopian, idealized nirvana of a comp comp, either by commenting on this post, or by dropping us a line, at brian@eighthblackbird.com. Oh, and creative name suggestions would be most welcome!
Comments 12
wow, no way.
Posted 10 Mar 2010 at 12:45 PM ¶I am curious as to what part of the regulations were so offensive. I don’t remember anything being unreasonable.
Posted 10 Mar 2010 at 1:37 PM ¶Perhaps best would be to find a sponsor for the competition who can cover the costs associated with collecting and judging compositions. They, of course, would get their name on the competition. For instance “The Edmund B. and Helga M.S. Benningsworth 8bb comp comp” or “The Chicago Bears 8bb comp comp”.
Posted 10 Mar 2010 at 3:21 PM ¶Well done. I am glad you guys are doing the right thing and setting a positive example. I will note this on the blog.
Posted 10 Mar 2010 at 9:35 PM ¶Thank you for being flexible and responsive. It’s rare and incredibly welcome.
Posted 14 Mar 2010 at 7:49 PM ¶great that there’s more time – that was my only concern – but i think the rules/regulations were pretty standard! i’ve been asked for much much more to enter competitions i’ve not had a chance in hell winning ..
i think that the most ideal change would be to recognize a few entries rather than just one – i.e. first prize = $1000, second and third prizes = rehearsal/performance. that way more people benefit from the biggest things 8bb can offer – your time, expertise and status – without necessarily costing 8bb more hard cash.
Posted 29 Mar 2010 at 5:45 AM ¶I agree with everything that people have said but I’d like to emphasize what Julian Day commented about.
Having some feedback for runner-ups from 8bb would be really helpful for composers.
Posted 06 Apr 2010 at 10:15 AM ¶People will always find something to complain about, regardless of what happens. I don’t remember anything unreasonable at all about the contest, except thinking “$50? That’s a bit steep, but it IS 8bb…” and logged on to send in an entry today.
If I had to pick my ideal contest scenario, two things I would suggest are feedback for semi-finalists and not taking 6-8 months to post updates or results. Most contests are maddeningly slow in this regard… Anyhow, looking forward to the relaunch!
Posted 09 Apr 2010 at 11:21 AM ¶I actually had spoken to Matt (very nicely, I thought) about the competition. Both issues have been spoken about: first was the amount of time before the close of the competition (though I did finish my piece in time…), and second was the fee.
Posted 15 Apr 2010 at 8:37 AM ¶My comment was that since all of the members of the ensemble TRULY are composers’ best friends (in all senses), that perhaps a five-month lead time (instead of the three that it was), and a “gentler” entry fee (say $25-$30), would be a better fit. The very high fees seem only to be charged by the European competitions…
I don’t remember objecting to any of the rules when I read them, but the entry fee was extremely high relative to those for similar competitions. This struck me as willfully ignorant of the fact that some composers have MUCH more disposable income than others. With a fee of that size, you were guaranteeing yourselves a competition field that would favor wealthier composers — disproportionately excluding independent and young/emerging composers.
And in practical terms, I am willing to bet that a $25 fee rather than a $50 fee would produce more than twice as many submissions.
Posted 15 Apr 2010 at 7:19 PM ¶UPDATE: We’ve relaunched the composition contest in partnership with the American Composers Forum and MakeMusic, Inc.
No entry fee; longer timeline; no need to write a complete piece to enter; three finalists.
Hope you like.
http://www.composersforum.org/programs_detail.cfm?oid=12474
Posted 28 Jun 2010 at 11:50 AM ¶Thank you (again) for the reconsideration. I expect you’ll get far more entries from people who deserve to enter, not just the independently wealthy who enter all the competitions they can regardless of fees. $50 was really unreasonable as a fee, but it was especially bad if there was only a single winner. With the current rules, there are three finalists and you’re sure to get three outstanding pieces out of this.
Posted 09 Aug 2010 at 4:12 AM ¶Post a Comment