[dynisor]

Hmm. It’s more like you want to hear the musician play first, but you don’t ask him to play something he is comfortable with to learn how skilled he is, nor do you ask him to play a known challenging piece of work. Instead you just start pulling out short “gotcha” songs with obscure key shifts and speed changes to test them. Like, sure a great musician will be able to handle it if they are a great musician, but it’s just annoying for the musician and there should be better ways to determine if they meet your expectations.

[noleetcode]

The example I always give people is imagine that you're a civil engineer and you walk into the interview and they have a bunch of Popsicle sticks, sticky tack, and a bowling ball.

They inform you that your interview is to build a bridge with the sticks and tack that can support the bowling ball rolling across it.

(Yes, I know the age-old argument that 'real' Engineers are accredited and all that, but I still think the example shows how ridiculous it all is)

[TheCoelacanth]

"Sightreading", i.e. playing a piece you've never seen before on the spot, is something that musicians are commonly asked to do in auditions.

[dynisor]

Of course, but this is like if the whole interview were they have you sight read 10 bars of music, and then 8 bars of a different genre, then 18 bars of another harder one. Then they just spam those at you for the duration of the audition. That is the whole thing. Like, yes. It is “a” way to do it, but it is understandable that there would be musicians who aren’t fond of that interview style.