A new perspective on competitions is presented by Thomas Ospital, the extraordinary and dynamic professor at the CNSMDP and titular organist of the Saint-Eustache Cathedral in Paris.
O.N.: You are regularly invited to serve on the juries of international competitions. Have you noticed any changes in the candidates’ profiles over the years? In terms of skill level (technical, musical, etc.)?
T.O.: Having only recently joined the juries, it is still difficult for me to take a comprehensive view of the evolution in the skill level of organists in competitions. However, I have noticed that the skill level gap between candidates is widening. Some demonstrate great technical ability and can tackle a wide repertoire with confidence.
On the other hand, I sometimes notice a lack of organistic culture in the instrumental sense of the term. Registration choices are not always suited to the particular organ being played, and its specific characteristics are sometimes overlooked in favour of standardised solutions. Furthermore, some candidates seem to struggle when adapting to an instrument with a distinct character.
That said, it is worth remembering that these musicians are at the beginning of their careers and that this learning phase is also one of discovery and developing an artistic identity.
O.N.: Do you think that the evaluation criteria used, which often depend on the jury chair, serve as a safeguard to prevent any deviations? Have you identified any biases that might affect the evaluation of performances and, ultimately, the final results?
T.O.: I recently became aware of the significant disparities that can exist between the expectations of different jury members. It seems we don’t all listen to the same things: each person has their own criteria and personal — and sometimes highly subjective — expectations, which can significantly influence the final vote.
I have experienced this myself, and it has caused me real distress. While this diversity of approaches can enrich discussions, it also makes evaluations more vulnerable to individual biases, particularly in the absence of clearly defined, shared criteria.
O.N.: Does the ‘Audience Award’ mean anything to you? And if so, what does it mean?
T.O.: Yes, of course — the Audience Award is very meaningful. Throughout their careers, these musicians will be confronted far more often with the gaze and ears of the audience than with those of their peers. Therefore, it is not surprising—nor problematic—that the audience’s results differ from those of the jury. Their expectations are simply different: while the jury evaluates based on specific technical, stylistic, or artistic criteria, the audience reacts primarily to emotion, stage presence, and the immediate impact of a performance. These two perspectives are complementary, not contradictory.
Read Thomas Ospital’s full interview in ON 73 (Spring 2026).
