It’s fine if it’s the only instrument the OP knows how to play, but IME, many applicants to higher education know how to play instruments. Guitar, flute, sax, piano–heck, even trombone–are instruments that undergrads know how to play. They typically play them very well. I jammed occasionally (flute and vocal) with the band that my law school class put together, and we performed publicly. We sounded great and had a lot of fun.
But we weren’t at law school to play music. We were there to study law.
Given my experience, I’m still wondering: why does the OP feel that violin is so important? Does violin impart more significance to an admissions committee than flute? Than a skilled guitarist who has passed guitar performance exams? Than a saxophonist who has done recording sessions with R&B stars? Than anybody who can play an instrument well enough to perform for an audience, paying or not? Music is fun, but if is not the school’s focus, then IMHO, it is just another extracurricular.
So I’m wondering: why does the OP think his proficiency on the violin will put him ahead of others when he’s applying to a school that emphasizes math and sciences, instead of music?
I’ve always gotten the impression that the violin/viola/cello sort of instruments, along with harpsichord, plain harp, and piano are considered “better” than other instruments in some way. I almost said string instruments, but guitar, due to popularity is usually excluded (and Banjo/mandolin etc? Forget about it). In high school there was always this unspoken class distinction, where at all the sophisticated events the string orchestra would get to play, whereas the wind symphony got less important stuff – despite the fact that our wind symphony was Carnegie level and the orchestra wasn’t. This is despite all the beautiful, quiet, sophisticated pieces the wind symphony would make a part of the show – so it’s not like we were blasting obnoxious bombastic music all the time that would ruin a quiet event.
I really don’t think it’s in any way a rational or fair bias. Nor one that’s grounded in reality in any meaningful way, but I’ve always gotten the impression that a violin player is just plain to be respected more than a flute player. Even popular culture stereotypes reinforce it pretty heavily: we have the “band geeks”, the “stoners in a (rock/metal) band”, the “wannabe/poser/asshole rapper”, and then the “quiet, brilliant (usually Asian) guy who plays Violin/Piano”.
Maybe we could add choir to the list of sophisticated musical talents, but Glee might have ruined that perception.
Plucked or hammered strings (guitar, harp, pianoforte) just a notch less so? (Although I give two thumbs up for this hammered dulcimer recital! This will get OP into MIT fersure.)
I think we’re in agreement here–that violin somehow gets more respect than other instruments. But I recall what my ex-wife (who played violin in her state orchestra) used to say: “Spoons, I was one of many, many, many violinists in the orchestra. But you were one of six flautists. Who worked harder to get their seat? Maybe you did.”
Good question, though I never played at the same level she did. Still, I took it as a compliment. (And as you may be able to tell, I am biased towards flute–good thing for the OP that I am not on the admissions committee of MIT. :))
Regardless, (and certainly regardless of instruments, and achievements, and so on), I’m still wondering: how does profiency on violin translate to potential success at a math and science school?
To be honest, for MIT I think it’s a non-issue. Last I checked, rappers (usually nerdcore) have come out of a lot of the top STEM institutions. I get the impression that while really good at violin might impress some schools quite a lot (even Harvard or Princeton), I always got the impression that MIT, Berkeley, etc tend to be more impressed by “colloquial talents.” That is, Harvard and such are impressed by “classy” things, whereas MIT, Stanford, CMU and such are more impressed by “quirky” things.
I may just be talking out of my ass, granted, but it’s always the impression I’ve gotten of the people I’ve known who have gone to those institutions (though I’ll grant it may be bias on the side of the students selecting the universities more than bias on the side of the admission boards). Certainly I don’t want to give the impression that violin would hinder anybody, or even that it wouldn’t be a plus, I just don’t think that it would be as BIG of a plus as some other things.
ETA: I’m biased towards flute and piccolo too, being a player of those instruments. Also trombone.
Ah, you need to know about Appalachian dulcimers (see this YouTube link). I’ve played along with these instruments before. They’re fun to listen to; and learning how to play them is on my bucket list.
There may not be a kiss at the end of the rainbow; but please, avoid the Catheter Song!
I, for one, have always wanted to be this guy. He completely kicks Pachelbel’s Canon’s ass with an electric guitar on a level those namby-pamby orchestra kids never do.
Somebody told me – or I read from some film director? – the clarinet is the penis of the orchestra. I have no idea what that means, but I like to say it sententiously at cocktail parties.
With research I now see the line is from Prova d’Orchestra (The Orchestra Rehearsal) by Fellini. The cite here says “someone” said it, but it was indeed the clarinetist. Other musicians chime in with other anatomical analogues for their instruments. I’m not sure if the lines were scripted.
If you want my actual real-life “what would be good for you as a person” advice, young man, here it is: take a year off before college and go get a job or volunteer or build houses in Peru or something. Get some perspective.
I also graduated from a US News “most selective” school in 2006. In high school I had a 3.98 GPA, was captain of the track team, captain of the ice hockey team, was on student council, sat first chair in All-State orchestra for two years, volunteered, blah blah blah… Know what I was when I got to college?
Completely average.
Looking back, I think one thing that made me stand out during the admissions process occurred during an entrance interview. Like others have said, pretty much everyone applying to the top schools has the grades and extracurriculars. My interviewer asked me specifically what I had done that other applicants hadn’t. My answer was that during the previous winter my friends and I had built an snow shelter in the woods complete with multiple rooms and a wood stove. We ended up spending a good amount of time just talking about that and other outdoor recreational activities. During the course of that conversation I found out my interviewer had founded my school’s outdoors club 40 years ago. I have no way of knowing for sure, but I’m fairly certain that coming across as a unique person during that interview provided something extra when it came to the admissions decision.
Yup. As I mentioned earlier, I was my HS class valedictorian (out of 423 students), and when I got to Cornell. Do you know how many class valedictorians were on my dorm FLOOR (that I knew of)?
Nine.
And that was one floor, and only the people I talked to regularly (which was about 1/3 of the floor, or roughly 40 kids). Most of the rest were top 10 students. (one of my floor-mates had made actually quite a stir earlier that year by suing to be valedictorian…and was actually named one of Time’s Most Interesting People of 1996 as a result…it didn’t matter in the long run of life, though).
Because I think the OP would benefit by reading this. He sounds like he could use a laugh. It’s the famous “John Mongan” letter, which he sent to MIT when they sent him a form letter urging him to apply to their school, and it’s very funny.
I skimmed the posts. Has anyone suggested getting involved in a science competition? Winning a prize in a really prestigious one is probably helpful. OTOH, the OP may not have time considering all the other stuff he’s doing.
I wouldn’t say it’s instant acceptance. A degree from MIT certainly opens a lot of doors if you want to work at an investment bank, a consulting firm like Mckinsey, Silcon Valley startups or “cool” companies like Google or Facebook. But it’s still extremely competetive. It’s not like you’re the only MIT grad competing against a bunch of state school morons.
Another thing I would recommend. Take a look at this thread.. While grades and education and career are extremely important, there is more to life then getting the perfect marks so you can go to the perfect school and get a job where you will work 100 hours a week building the perfect resume. You don’t want to wake up at 30 as some sort of successful but emotionally damaged weirdo who can’t relate to other humans because your entire focus has been on grades and career and whatnot.
The point is, I’ve seen plenty of kids like you who get it into their head they need perfect grades so they can get into this college or land that job after graduation and they end up freaking out and having a nervous breakdown or killing themselves because they think their life is over because they got an A-.
Yeah, it’ll give you about as good a chance as you are going to get. There is never a guarantee unless you are special. Tell me you won an Olympic medal (or at least competed in the olympics) and my opinion might change. Tell me your dad is a senator or billionaire and my opinion might change. Tell me your parents both went to MIT and my opinion might change. Tell me you are a competitive fencer or have an Olympic medal or you were the mayor of your town. Your application is going to look a lot like other applciations. Tell me you’re American Indian and my opinion might change. Tell me recently arrived from North Korea via Siberia and my opinion might change.
And don’t make the mistake of blowing off writing skill so early in life. It is probably one of the more important skills you will ever have. Mediocre talent with great writing ability are frequently confused for “authorities” in their field. Writing clearly and persuasively is something that will stay with you and get better over time. Being a great mathemetician is like being a great athlete, there is frequently a short shelf life and then you become old but a great writier only becomes better over time and its a skill that is useful in almost every human endeavor.
I went to Caltech, which I guess in some ways is similar to MIT. This was back several decades ago, so some things have probably changed, but here was my experience:
I had excellent grades in all subjects, especially math and science. I had excellent recommendations. My extra-curricular activities were so-so. I was a participant in several academically-oriented clubs, but I wasn’t a leader in any of them. I didn’t play an instrument. My essay was quite good, and very focussed on why I really wanted to go to Caltech over all other colleges. Oh yes, I was a white guy from Southern California, so I certainly wasn’t a diversity pick.
Really? What advice are you looking for? Because from what I can tell, you’re rejecting out of hand any advice or statement that doesn’t agree with what you already believe. Genuine question: what advice are you looking for?
