John,
Are you including those making a living in some way other than as the paradigmatic 'freelance operatic soloist', such as in musical theatre, choirs, etc.? Are they entirely supporting themselves from singing, or do they still live at home, have a spouse support them, etc... Are you basing your 3-5% on those who enter the bachelor of voice program, or are you adding grad students and 'late bloomers,' or not deducting those who don't finish the program.
If the estimate stands, then your school is doing far better than mine, although it's one of the top music schools in the states. (Still, I don't know of too many other career areas that would "boast" of a 3-5% placement rate.)
-John (keepin' it real)
--- In vocalist-temporary@y..., John Alexander Blyth <vocalist-temporary@y..., John Alexander Blyth < While none of them are big stars (yet?) a number of young singers of my acquaintance do have careers (in singing, I should add!). Even so I would put the percentage (rough estimate) a 3-5%. I remember doing an informal survey of the people (all instruments) who got their B. Mus. here at the same time I did. I think about 15% of them were fully employed in some kind > of musical activity apart from teaching. When I included teaching it was a > much higher figure - more like 80% of the whole group. > But having said that: there are easier ways to make more money. You must > have either an aptitude or a need. > It occurs to me a lot recently that a singer is not necessarily a person > with a beautiful voice (there are many of those around) but a person with a > particular kind of determination, a capacity for peculiar discipline and > (for lack of a gentler epithet) a willingness to make a fool of herself in > public. The voice is just an optional bonus - many more people have > beautiful voices, a great ear and a pleasing countenance than have what it > takes to be > a singer. > That's what I think. > john
|
|
| |