Frsm Piano Options

[welltemperedklavier]

Well, I first need to seek approval of my previous associate and licentiate diplomas as appropriate professional experience if im going to be thinking of doing a fellowship diploma with abrsm. Does anyone know if just the diplomas themselves is likely to be enough or would I be expected to have a degree or something too?

Also, if I read the syllabus correctly, am I supposed to present a specialist programme which may concentrate on one composer or period once its internally balanced enough? So I could concentrate on Bach or 20th century composers for example? I dont suppose concertos would be accepted within a specialist option of some sort would they?

[Wai Kit Leung]

If you have a LRSM or equivalent, that should be enough as entrance requirement for taking your FRSM. Professional experience is not needed, and is only considered if LRSM is missing.

The specialist programme is an option but not a requirement for FRSM. It is up to the candidate. For myself, I chose a well-balance programme (Baroque, Classical, 20th-Century) for my FRSM. I think piano concertos are tricky because the accompaniment will be also a piano. Logistic aside (how many venues have two good pianos?), I think it's harder to hear the candidate when the accompanist is playing another piano. Just my 2 cents. Hope it helps!

[Robodoc]

The problem with a concerto is that there are no concertos on the given repertoire list. I think that's a big hint about what they expect. I don't think the format of "piano recital" includes concertos, even though there are concertos listed for many (possibly all, I haven't checked) other instruments. I suspect the reason for this is that it is the norm for most other instruments to have an accompanist for at least part of a recital whereas, it is not the norm for a pianist.

Good luck anyway!

[welltemperedklavier]

Thanks,
I probably wouldnt have went for a concerto anyway, I was just curious whether it was possible as an 'own choice' or something because I noticed RCM canada have concertos listed on the repertoire list for their new piano Licentiate but I dont live there... ( http://www.rcmexaminations.org/acadinfo/on...te_Syllabus.pdf )

I didnt see my diplomas listed as substitutes for LRSM, but most of the pieces I used for licentiate are on the lrsm list anyway except an own choice(liszt spanish rhapsody), and an own choice I did for associate is also on lrsm.

I have a few ideas for specialist options. I may end up going for a more balanced programme anyway but il have to be able to back up my choices too wont I so Il probably end up making this decision based around the written submission...

[SomePianist]

If you have a LRSM or equivalent, that should be enough as entrance requirement for taking your FRSM. Professional experience is not needed, and is only considered if LRSM is missing.

The specialist programme is an option but not a requirement for FRSM. It is up to the candidate. For myself, I chose a well-balance programme (Baroque, Classical, 20th-Century) for my FRSM. I think piano concertos are tricky because the accompaniment will be also a piano. Logistic aside (how many venues have two good pianos?), I think it's harder to hear the candidate when the accompanist is playing another piano. Just my 2 cents. Hope it helps!

Could you please let us know what your FRSM programme was, and how you approached your Written Submission for a more general programme? For example, I'd be very interested to know what the title was.

[Wai Kit Leung]

Could you please let us know what your FRSM programme was, and how you approached your Written Submission for a more general programme? For example, I'd be very interested to know what the title was.

I played the following for my FRSM:

Telemann Concerto in F minor
(attr) Haydn Concerto in C major
Hindemith Sonata for Oboe and Piano

I didn't have a title for my Written Submission. I just called it FRSM Written Submission. I wrote a bit about the instrument in general, then went on and talked about the composers and the pieces.

[SomePianist]

Could you please let us know what your FRSM programme was, and how you approached your Written Submission for a more general programme? For example, I'd be very interested to know what the title was.

I played the following for my FRSM:

Telemann Concerto in F minor
(attr) Haydn Concerto in C major
Hindemith Sonata for Oboe and Piano

I didn't have a title for my Written Submission. I just called it FRSM Written Submission. I wrote a bit about the instrument in general, then went on and talked about the composers and the pieces.

Thanks for sharing this with us. I'll have to read the Written Submission guidelines again as perhaps the requirements I have in my head are more complicated than those in the syllabus!

[organ_dummy]

I didn't have a title for my Written Submission. I just called it FRSM Written Submission. I wrote a bit about the instrument in general, then went on and talked about the composers and the pieces.

I wrote to the Board a while ago about the FRSM Written Submission. I was told that it was not good enough to discuss the composers and pieces (historically and analytically). Somehow the paper has to address performance issues.

[Wai Kit Leung]

I didn't have a title for my Written Submission. I just called it FRSM Written Submission. I wrote a bit about the instrument in general, then went on and talked about the composers and the pieces.

I wrote to the Board a while ago about the FRSM Written Submission. I was told that it was not good enough to discuss the composers and pieces (historically and analytically). Somehow the paper has to address performance issues.

Actually I did talk about performance issues with the pieces. I also mentioned the artists who had recorded the works, besides comparing the pieces to other pieces written in the eras and other works by those composers. It was a lot of work to write 5000 words on three pieces/composers. In that respect, it would have been easier if I had played a bigger number of short pieces.

[SomePianist]

I didn't have a title for my Written Submission. I just called it FRSM Written Submission. I wrote a bit about the instrument in general, then went on and talked about the composers and the pieces.

I wrote to the Board a while ago about the FRSM Written Submission. I was told that it was not good enough to discuss the composers and pieces (historically and analytically). Somehow the paper has to address performance issues.

Actually I did talk about performance issues with the pieces. I also mentioned the artists who had recorded the works, besides comparing the pieces to other pieces written in the eras and other works by those composers. It was a lot of work to write 5000 words on three pieces/composers. In that respect, it would have been easier if I had played a bigger number of short pieces.

Thanks for the info, which is very interesting. I had (mistakenly) thought one had to come up with some sort of 'theme' tying all the pieces together and then write about that theme using the pieces as examples. It is good to know that writing in-depth analyses of several disparate pieces (including all issues you mentioned) is permitted. It makes repertoire choice a good deal easier.

[confutatis]

I wrote about historically-informed performance in relation to three of the pieces in my recital. You don't have to cover all the pieces in your written submission.