I completely empathize with your position that a no-hire situation is always undesirable. I wonder if you might consider shifting your perspective to an organizational lens, though. In the case of the Victoria Symphony, they seem to be "regional" as a relatively understated group, but play a full season from September to May in addition to 2/3 summer weeks. Living in a global hotspot for tourists and where most Canadians refer to as the nicest place to live in the country translates to a higher artistic output, regardless of wage. Already, the context that you've assumed seems to derail from the given reality of one of the most successful orchestras, one that has always stayed afloat amidst economic uncertainty even at times when every other Canadian orchestra has fallen into budget deficit. I encourage you to envision yourself on any of these committees where methodical audition procedures and democratic principles are enforced by union agreement - not by verbal statement. Even if you were biased or wanted to "skip" to the international round, how would you go about that? Many committees are not allowed to hold discussions when auditioning preliminary rounds, nevermind allowing for the notion of assuming they will not hire. This scapegoat myth seems to be a common one amongst audition candidates, and one that unfortunately doesn't pertain to a realistic audition committee scenario. This especially applies to many North American auditions, where the presence of a union representative/proctor is mandated in policy. You said:"10 of us showed up for an audition that was a guaranteed win for any really highly qualified first-timer." That mentality alone already makes me a skeptic. Even as a full-time player in a tenured position, I never go into audition scenarios for any orchestra, big or small, with this degree of assumption. Your statement that "no international candidate in their right mind is going to be drawn to this position" also draws a lot of doubt, as VS recently held a few international auditions that all led to great hires and higher audition numbers. Also, you should know that there is a duality to the proposal of just picking someone for probation or trials. Firstly, some orchestras do not have these options in their collective bargaining agreements and thus it is not an option. Zooming out, if the level a committee hears is not promising in envisioning a successful probationary period, I'm not sure if it'd be the right thing to toss around trials/probations. Especially in this case where you suppose that Victoria itself is "tiny, remote, and near inaccessible" (which is relatively untrue), the committee would be asking for someone to temporarily relocate their entire life for potentially an entire year without promise. To my understanding, VS held 8 auditions this year in a matter of 2 weeks, and hired people at 7 out of 8 of these auditions. 6 of these were national auditions. While I understand your frustrations in many audition scenarios playing out without no-hires, framing a smaller orchestra with unrealistic context like this in a public sphere does not seem productive nor helpful in any way or form. And yes - some guy from Cleveland Institute just might show up. If I browse the biographies of these musicians, easily accessible via their website, it's clear that many of their players come from institutions like these: Rice, Cleveland, Colburn, Juilliard... the list goes on. Perhaps next time you might consider doing just a bit more research before overstepping in this capacity. More importantly, I implore you to put yourself in the shoes of these committees where audition procedure is not a matter of personal choice but of strictly unionized operation. Nobody likes a no-hire, agreed - and that includes the committee.