Components of the Exam

1. Submission of Materials:

In the beginning of the candidacy exam semester, the student submits the following materials:

• Two annotated bibliographies (about 50 entries each), a general one for the field of music technology and another in the student's area of research specialization

• A one-page statement of research and tentative dissertation plan

• An up-to-date CV including list of relevant coursework

• At least two papers published, accepted, or submitted for peer review (either in conference proceedings or a journal)

Bibliography guidelines can be found at these links:

• Guidelines for Preparing Music Doctoral Candidacy Bibliographies

• MARL Candidacy Wiki (permission required to view the page - please contact your advisor if you need access)

2. Written Exam (two parts):

• The technology component includes four questions sent to the candidate three weeks in advance of the exam date. On the exam date, the candidate is given one of those questions and four hours to write an essay (roughly 10 pages, but no official amount) addressing the question without access to written materials or the internet. Access to a computer with no internet connection is given during the exam. Questions are open and broad, but generally relevant to the areas of specialization and interest of the candidate. They are written by the student’s advisor and discussed/edited by the faculty before submission.

• The music component includes two questions sent to the candidate one week in advance of the exam date. On the exam day, the candidate is given one of the questions and has four hours to write an essay addressing the question without access to written materials or the internet. Questions require formal analysis of a musical piece (with students generally given the choice between a piece in common-practice tonal style or contemporary/Jazz style), score annotations (a score is provided), and historical contextualization (e.g. influences, impact, social context). The questions are written by the music theory faculty. The piece can be analyzed using any of the official methods taught in the department. One of the following two classes is typically taken to prepare for the analysis: MPATC-GE 2109 Narrative Writing for Music Analysis and MPATC-GE 2201 Seminar in Music Theory: Schenkerian Analysis.

3. Oral Examination:

Three weeks after the written examination the candidate will be examined orally by a three-member committee. The committee typically consists of a faculty member in music technology (chair), music/performing arts, and the technical/scientific discipline most relevant to the candidate’s research. Committee members review all submitted materials and the answers to the written exam in advance of the oral examination. The exam lasts approximately one hour, with extra time for committee deliberation. Candidates are asked to open with a brief statement about their research and scholarly interests (no more than 5 minutes), and the following Q & A might touch upon specific answers to the written exam, the candidate’s publications and statement, and general topics in music technology. It is a feature of the exam that candidates will be asked about their music analysis, and probed in areas that are deemed to be underdeveloped in the view of the music faculty.

The possible outcomes of the exam are pass, pass with conditions, or fail. The most common outcome is pass with conditions, with conditions ranging from additional coursework to writing an essay on a specific topic of the committee’s choice (or possibly a revision of one of the essays). An outcome of fail requires for the student to go through the process again, and is accompanied by the committee’s recommendation on any additional preparations are necessary.

Sample Candidacy Questions for the Technology Portion of the Written Exam

1. Describe and discuss past and current work on music and emotion. What are the limitations of current methods? What significant problems need to be addressed? Are there hard limitations on what can be generalized from empirical observations? Discuss these problems from both technical and perceptual perspectives.

2. Write a critical review of the state of the art in machine listening: identify limitations and opportunities for improvement, and discuss how we can leverage knowledge from other domains to advance the field.

3. Discuss the evolution of music and technology touching on the notion of electronic, electro-acoustic, computer music, and music technology. Provide specific examples for each and elaborate on the differences, nuances, and commonalities; philosophical, aesthetic, technological, and historical issues; and how you see our field develop as an interdisciplinary field for research and creative exploration in the next 5 years.

4. Write an essay on musical timbre, including discussions on its definition, perception, modeling, and creative manipulation. What are the milestones in musical timbre research of the past four decades, its current trends and, in your opinion, the most promising avenues for future research?