Practical Exams Are Advantageous For Piano Student Options

[geigespieler]

I've read somewhere that the examiners for ABRSM graded practical exams are generalist musicians rather than specialist musicians. (Meaning that the examiner don't play the instrument that he is examining you for).
But i think this is true only for non-piano students. After all, aren't all these examiners pianists, since they have to play the piano to test you on aural? So, it could be to the piano students advantage (or disadvantage?) that the examiner plays the same instrument as them.

Also, as i've posted in the teacher's forum,

i feel that the aurals at higher grade are structured around students taking piano exams.

Because, chord is a staple diet of piano playing, a pianist at grade 8 level would be so used to playing chords, that he would have no problem identifying cadences, naming the chords of the cadence and identifying modulations. But for a flute student who only learns the flute, how on earth would you expect him to listen out for cadences and chord progressions when all that he has been playing on his instrument is single melody line? Learning the flute alone does not train a person naturally to tackle these aural tests at grade 8, while learning the piano alone does helps the student to acquire these skills along the way for the aural when they reach grade 8. So, i think that it's a little bit unfair to expect all non-piano students to be tested on aural using the piano.

[s8535049]

i know of someone who was offered the position of examiner but turned it down because he wouldn't be able to play the aural tests on the piano at the higher grades. his specialty is mainly in brass instruments. so no, the examiner needn't be a pianist. also, an examiner will only learn one aural test per grade, so though the grade 8 aural may sound good, it's been well prepared and perhaps even memorised - so there's some knowledge/ability required, but they needn't be a pianist.

[Rosie_piano_cello]

My examiner for grade 5 went wrong when he was playing the piece for test D in the aural, so he had to start again! I suppose it shows examiners are human after all. Highly amusing all the same... :lol:

[Helen]

I've read somewhere that the examiners for ABRSM graded practical exams are generalist musicians rather than specialist musicians. (Meaning that the examiner don't play the instrument that he is examining you for).
But i think this is true only for non-piano students. After all, aren't all these examiners pianists, since they have to play the piano to test you on aural? So, it could be to the piano students advantage (or disadvantage?) that the examiner plays the same instrument as them.

Also, as i've posted in the teacher's forum, 

i feel that the aurals at higher grade are structured around students taking piano exams.

Because, chord is a staple diet of piano playing, a pianist at grade 8 level would be so used to playing chords, that he would have no problem identifying cadences, naming the chords of the cadence and identifying modulations. But for a flute student who only learns the flute, how on earth would you expect him to listen out for cadences and chord progressions when all that he has been playing on his instrument is single melody line? Learning the flute alone does not train a person naturally to tackle these aural tests at grade 8, while learning the piano alone does helps the student to acquire these skills along the way for the aural when they reach grade 8. So, i think that it's a little bit unfair to expect all non-piano students to be tested on aural using the piano.

Is it a requirement for examiners to have some competance on the piano?

Although you have raised good points, even for single-melody line instruments, you still have an accompaniment (for example) for some pieces when you perform. So one would be used to hearing cadences and identifying these? One doesn't have to play an instrument such as piano which I agree with you about the chords, but surely anyone (not just single melody line instrumentalists ) listens to music, and can identify certain features?

If the above post makes sense to anyone other than me of course...)

[geigespieler]

I've read somewhere that the examiners for ABRSM graded practical exams are generalist musicians rather than specialist musicians. (Meaning that the examiner don't play the instrument that he is examining you for).
But i think this is true only for non-piano students. After all, aren't all these examiners pianists, since they have to play the piano to test you on aural? So, it could be to the piano students advantage (or disadvantage?) that the examiner plays the same instrument as them.

Also, as i've posted in the teacher's forum, 

i feel that the aurals at higher grade are structured around students taking piano exams.

Because, chord is a staple diet of piano playing, a pianist at grade 8 level would be so used to playing chords, that he would have no problem identifying cadences, naming the chords of the cadence and identifying modulations. But for a flute student who only learns the flute, how on earth would you expect him to listen out for cadences and chord progressions when all that he has been playing on his instrument is single melody line? Learning the flute alone does not train a person naturally to tackle these aural tests at grade 8, while learning the piano alone does helps the student to acquire these skills along the way for the aural when they reach grade 8. So, i think that it's a little bit unfair to expect all non-piano students to be tested on aural using the piano.

Is it a requirement for examiners to have some competance on the piano?

Although you have raised good points, even for single-melody line instruments, you still have an accompaniment (for example) for some pieces when you perform. So one would be used to hearing cadences and identifying these? One doesn't have to play an instrument such as piano which I agree with you about the chords, but surely anyone (not just single melody line instrumentalists ) listens to music, and can identify certain features?

If the above post makes sense to anyone other than me of course...)

But for an average flute or perhaps violin student like me, i only get to rehearse with the piano for at most 5 sessions before my exams, due to time and financial constraints. And i do listen to a lot of concertos and symphonies, but yet when it comes to my grade 8 aural, i can at most differentiate the cadences, but i totally can't make any sense between the different modulations and can't tell what the other two chords are before the cadence.

For me, i listen to the music simply because i enjoy the music, i wouldn't bother to try to analyse what modulations or chord progressions has gone through the music that i'm listening to. I would tend to be more aware of such details about the music only when i'm looking at the score and attempting to play it. I think this is the case for many average non-piano music student like myself.

[oboist]

My understanding is all examiners have to be competent pianists to about Grade 6 or 7 standard or they cannot cope with the demands of playing the more senior aural tests. I'm sure they all have more than one test per grade to play: certainly my pupils talk about different pieces when we think about how the aural went in their exam. Either that or my pupils have all heard the same piece very differently! :o

Overall, I think the senior aural tests do favour pianists who are used to hearing harmonic structure in the normal course of events as they play but they are also about testing overall musical knowledge. There have been several strands on these forums as to whether, or not, you can be a good musician if you don't have the theoretical and aural skills to support your playing.

Personally I think the grade 7/8 tests are hard but, if done properly, they do ensure that someone who says they are of that standard has demonstrated some basic understanding of music beyond just the ability to "learn the notes" on their instrument - assuming, of course, that they've tried to make any attempt to master the tests at all.

I suppose an attempt at an analogy might be that we can go to a swimming pool, swim around and enjoy ourselves. However, if we want to get to Olympic standard, we've got to put in hours and hours of training, concentrating on very specific techniques and learning as much as we can overall about the sport. Grade 8 and beyond requires "olympic" standard to do really well and that comes from a full and proper understanding of the subject.

[maggiemay]

My understanding is all examiners have to be competent pianists to about Grade 6 or 7 standard or they cannot cope with the demands of playing the more senior aural tests. I'm sure they all have more than one test per grade to play: certainly my pupils talk about different pieces when we think about how the aural went in their exam. Either that or my pupils have all heard the same piece very differently!

Yes - my understanding is the same.

I sent for details of becoming an examiner a few years ago ( I didn't go ahead with applying because on reflection the weeks away from home would have been difficult at that time) and competence on the piano in order to play the aural tests effectively was definitely stated. In fact I found myself wondering whether my status as a second-study pianist would be questioned. B)

[AnotherPianist]

But for an average flute or perhaps violin student like me, i only get to rehearse with the piano for at most 5 sessions before my exams, due to time and financial constraints. And i do listen to a lot of concertos and symphonies, but yet when it comes to my grade 8 aural, i can at most differentiate the cadences, but i totally can't make any sense between the different modulations and can't tell what the other two chords are before the cadence.

Harmony is as important to flautists and violinists as to pianists. It's very rare to get people playing entirely pieces that are single melody lines no accompaniment. Imagine getting together a Classical orchestra (comprised of single line instruments), harmony will be a vitally important part of any music that they play but none of them need to understand it, that doesn't sound like a good idea. Well maybe you say but 'the conductor will be a pianist' is it fair to say that the only people who can ever become conductors (or indeed composers) are pianists? We'd have lost a lot of greats from the past if this were the case....

For me, i listen to the music simply because i enjoy the music, i wouldn't bother to try to analyse what modulations or chord progressions has gone through the music that i'm listening to. I would tend to be more aware of such details about the music only when i'm looking at the score and attempting to play it. I think this is the case for many average non-piano music student like myself.

Why not try taking a deeper interest in the music that you listen to? I know of many non-instrumentalists who listen to music with much more of an understanding than that: try to understand the music you listen to, don't let it pass you by. Just because you don't have the score doesn't mean you can't attempt to understand it.

[elmo]

Everytime I listen to music, if I know it's a sonata I'll try and work out where the sections start. If I don't know it's form, I work it out (or try!). If there's some imitation i think"ooo imitation!"

I still enjoy listneing though.

[YetAnotherPianist]

I think you must be missing out terribly if you've never played 'spot the cycle of 5ths' whilst listening to music :lol:.

[elmo]

That is one thing I can never hear! I can hear it changing key, but my teacher sat there for ages playing it over lots and lots of times asking me what it was and I didn't have a clue!

[YetAnotherPianist]

That is one thing I can never hear! I can hear it changing key, but my teacher sat there for ages playing it over lots and lots of times asking me what it was and I didn't have a clue!

OK, start easy. Do you have any Vivaldi violin concerti to listen to? The first thing to try and listen for is the rocking do-fa,ti-mi,la-re,so-do feeling in the bass.

The other progression you might be able to pick up a little more easily perhaps it the Pachelbel's canon progression: I V vi iii IV I.

[elmo]

I don't have any vivaldi at all, but I have Pachabel's canon. Is that just based on the cycle of fifths?!

[saxlover]

I ahve Pachelbel's Canon too!

[YetAnotherPianist]

I don't have any vivaldi at all, but I have Pachabel's canon. Is that just based on the cycle of fifths?!

No, it's a different but still very popular progression I V vi iii IV I (followed by IV V between repeats in this case). It's used all over the place, I'm not that familiar with very recent popular music but I recall Green Day using it in a few places (oh, they're trendy again now :rolleyes:) and the Pet Shop Boys.

The cycle of 5ths is I IV vii iii vi ii V I. Have a go at playing C F B E A D G C on whatever instrument you have handy. If it's piano, all the better: play the bass rocking back and forth (start on C, down to F, up to B, down to E etc.), and play in the right hand EGC, FAB, DFB, EGB etc. Play it over and over and get used to the sound, then the cycle of 5ths will start leaping out at you wherever it is :)

What baroque music do you have, any Bach keyboard works? I'm just thinking of pieces where I can tell you off-hand where it is. Oh, I've found a midi which might help - it's Bach's Prelude in G Minor, No. 16 from The Well-Tempered Clavier. Once it gets past the third big trill, there's a bar of melody in the left hand before it goes to the right - at this point a cycle of fifths starts.