PonyFans.com

Damn.....

http://college.usatoday.com/2014/06/19/ ... ed-states/

Wow. Pretty nice company on that list!!

gostangs wrote:Wow. Pretty nice company on that list!!

Even better - they're all listed >>after<< SMU.

I am not a music guy, but shouldn't a list like this have places like Juilliard or Curtis on it?

Berklee?

Really cool!

Check out the comments to the article.

couch 'em wrote:I am not a music guy, but shouldn't a list like this have places like Juilliard or Curtis on it?

After reading the methodology, it seems they put a lot of emphasis on how the major fits within the broader quality of the school and other available and related majors. Conservatories like Julliard have limited areas of study and won't score well with these matrices.

Always thought UNT was the favorite here.

smusic 00 wrote:

couch 'em wrote:I am not a music guy, but shouldn't a list like this have places like Juilliard or Curtis on it?

After reading the methodology, it seems they put a lot of emphasis on how the major fits within the broader quality of the school and other available and related majors. Conservatories like Julliard have limited areas of study and won't score well with these matrices.

Exactly.

These rankings are for "normal" universities where the music program is good and can be enjoyed by the student as part of a great education (which is why NTSU is not on the list even though they do have a great music program as everybody knows).

I mean, seriously, there are probably exactly zero people who would get a rejection letter from Berklee and an acceptance letter from Meadows and think they are a lock to perform at La Scala or Carnegie Hall.

I'd rather be #1 at football

smusic 00 wrote:

couch 'em wrote:I am not a music guy, but shouldn't a list like this have places like Juilliard or Curtis on it?

After reading the methodology, it seems they put a lot of emphasis on how the major fits within the broader quality of the school and other available and related majors. Conservatories like Julliard have limited areas of study and won't score well with these matrices.

If that was the case then why isn't the writer's alma mater, USC, on there? Strikes me as a bit odd.
On a side note, one of the commentators, Frank Ticheli, is a Richardson native and a graduate of SMU and teaches at USC. He's also a world class composer.

While UNT probably has a broader range of quality offerings in music, SMU is almost certainly a better place for orchestral training. Primarily because SMU offers something UNT doesn't: almost all of the principals of the Dallas Symphony teach at SMU. UNT has many fine teachers of orchestral instruments but it is hard to compete with principals at a major symphony who are still 'on the job' (not to mention being an easy drive/light rail ride away from the students hearing them perform). Another draw for SMU is studio size- it's nice to be one of 8-10 horns in a studio rather than one of 30-40, for example. UNT would certainly be the better choice for jazz, commercial, and music education.

RGV Pony: I imagine there is not a lot of overlap between the students who apply to Berklee and SMU; Berklee's bread and butter, perhaps to an even greater extent then UNT, is jazz and commercial music (in the realm of classical music, Berklee is not the top dog, reputation wise, in their own town). SMU does compete with, and gets many students with offers to Eastman, CCM, etc. and you will find Meadows alumni in top orchestras around the country.

My biggest question about that list is how did some of the other schools make it on to it? Given the criteria, SMU should certainly be on the list, though honestly probably not at no. 1; it is a mystery to me how Michigan and Indiana, two traditional music school powerhouses inside of great universities, were left off the list. Northwestern, Rice, and USC should be ahead of most of those schools also; Rice's Sheppard School of Music might be the finest orchestral training school west of the Mississippi.

michiganstang wrote:While UNT probably has a broader range of quality offerings in music, SMU is almost certainly a better place for orchestral training. Primarily because SMU offers something UNT doesn't: almost all of the principals of the Dallas Symphony teach at SMU. UNT has many fine teachers of orchestral instruments but it is hard to compete with principals at a major symphony who are still 'on the job' (not to mention being an easy drive/light rail ride away from the students hearing them perform). Another draw for SMU is studio size- it's nice to be one of 8-10 horns in a studio rather than one of 30-40, for example. UNT would certainly be the better choice for jazz, commercial, and music education.

RGV Pony: I imagine there is not a lot of overlap between the students who apply to Berklee and SMU; Berklee's bread and butter, perhaps to an even greater extent then UNT, is jazz and commercial music (in the realm of classical music, Berklee is not the top dog, reputation wise, in their own town). SMU does compete with, and gets many students with offers to Eastman, CCM, etc. and you will find Meadows alumni in top orchestras around the country.

My biggest question about that list is how did some of the other schools make it on to it? Given the criteria, SMU should certainly be on the list, though honestly probably not at no. 1; it is a mystery to me how Michigan and Indiana, two traditional music school powerhouses inside of great universities, were left off the list. Northwestern, Rice, and USC should be ahead of most of those schools also; Rice's Sheppard School of Music might be the finest orchestral training school west of the Mississippi.

It would be curious to see what the percentages look like of alumni from the various schools at SMU with regards to donations to their respective schools, Mustang Club, and the university in total.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

It would pretty predictable -

Rank:
Cox Business
Engineering
Dedman
Education
Meadows
Perkins.