I'm trying to get a sense of what is and is not a passing standard for the various grades. You can read the assessment criteria, but they are (for necessary reasons) pretty vague too "A good sense of... good application of..." Good is something of a moveable feast relative to grade levels - some pretty scratchy bowing is accepted at the Prep Test but won't fly in grade 5. The standard of acceptable presentation moves with the grades too, and while I have a pretty secure sense of what music goes with which grade level in terms of technical difficulty, expected range of techniques, etc. it's hard to know what is an OK standard to present in the exam and what is not. The CDs and such present you with a professional performance, and whilst it would be lovely to aspire to turning up to a grade 1 exam with a technically proficient and musical performance on a great instrument with a wide range of techniques and brilliant dynamics, a musical performance that makes you weep with its intricacy...well, it's grade 1, something nervous, wooden and with the odd mistake in it is probably nearer the mark.

Just how well do you have to do to pass? I've done the general maths and found that if you get a perfect score on aural tests you can actually marginally fail all the pieces and still pass your exam - bodes well for players of second, third and more instruments whose early grade aural presents no challenges whatsoever. I just can't get a sense of what is a passing level and what is not, and I'm even more confused after doing my music medals training. The platinum music level is meant to correlate to about grade 3 standard and performances with errors in them are still passing performances. Anyone can have a bad moment when a position shift goes wrong, a brass instrument refuses to emit the correct note, a clarinet squeaks, but I'm surprised that actual wrong notes and false starts came away with passes too.

This is in fact true and happened to a particularly nervous but musical pupil of mine. She failed all pieces by one or two marks but was good on her other tests and so passed overall.

This does seem to be a difficult thing to judge. I've had a pupil make a serious false start and break down after 2 or 3 lines in a grade 5 piece simply through nerves, and yet she passed well. In many cases (judging from pupils that I have put through exams) a musical performance is an important factor once you get to about grade 3 - maybe there's more room for interpretation of the criteria for grades 1 and 2?

Based on the assessment criteria and exemplars for the Music Medals it seems that a false start can be mostly ignored. The exams are not the same as a performance, where a false start would be a big thing, they are supposed to assess if the candidate has it in them to perform to the given standard. If they give clear evidence that they can perform to that standard having composed themselves properly and got it under control it looks like the false start is broadly ignored where pieces are concerned.

This might happen on rare occasions, but in real life it is more likely to pass on the pieces and mess up the aural

Not necessarily, Mad Tom. When I was a littl'un doing grade 4 flute in the middle of the last century, I managed to stuff up all the pieces, flunk the sight-reading spectacularly and get full marks on the aural for a scrape pass overall.

I still recall the sight-reading comment: "If you had noticed the time signature, the key signature or the rhythm, you might have done better"


Perhaps it isn't that surprising it took more than a quarter of a century before I did grade 5 flute....

Looking at my results (both my pupils' and my own), it's far more likely that full marks will be achieved in aural than in anything else. I have never had a full mark from a pupil or achieved by myself in scales or sight-reading...

I am expecting that comment for my son's sightreading in his forthcoming exam.

Not for players of subsequent instruments. If I took grade 1 on something brand new and unfamiliar - let's say for argument's sake a cello - I don't find it likely I will drop any marks on aural, it's a free lunch for me at that level because I've done a grade 8, a 7, a 6, a university music course and army music, variety of Royal School of Church Music stuff, have performed a number of concerts where one arrives at 2pm for a sight-sing through the entire set of works and the concert goes out to proper paying public at 7.30pm plus I am preparing for grade 8 Practical Musicianship. Beating time to a couple of bars of music in a familiar and regular time and that sort of thing presents me with no challenges at all.

Sure, but I think your situation qualifies as a "rare" case - most grade 1 (or for that matter higher grade) candidates don't have that kind of background!

What a great quote.

My last G4 pupil had the sight-reading comment "key signature correctly identified and then completely ignored".

To the original question, that of a 'passing' standard, I think that in general (and certainly the earlier grades) if you play the piece slightly slowly, with a little false start and a couple of stumbles and/or the odd wrong note or beat, but with the notes and rhythm broadly in place, some attempt at dynamics and style and with a reasonable continuity, then you will certainly get a pass.

That's great! Seemed to have been an exminer with a good sense of humor. I think if this will happen to me I would still be able to laugh about the comment.

As you only have to get 100 overall and not pass every section it is fairly obvious that marginally failing any section (or more than one) can be balanced out by doing well enough in another section provided you pass one by more marks than you failed the other (s).

Personally Aural has always been my weak spot and not being able to do grades 5,6,7,8 aural in my piano exams didn't particularly help me manage grade 3 or 5 aural in my flute exams! When I was a child this tended to be balanced out by good sight reading marks, now I would say scales are my "easy marks" section and are the only section I've ever got full marks in.

Whether you are happy to exploit that to your advantage depends on what your goal is - is it more important to get the bit of paper or more important to learn to play the instrument?

For my grade 8 piano I failed one of the pieces, only marginally passed the other two, failed the scales, failed the aural but passed overall due to my good sight reading (and I didn't get a perfect score for that!). Despite technically passing, it still feels like I didn't REALLY pass - it was just that, a pass on a technicality and even 23 years later it still rankles a bit. So much so that I am considering retaking it just so I can pass it properly, I don't feel like I need a merit, never mind a distinction....just a good solid pass on all sections would make me feel like I genuinely deserve the certificate. So although I did pass without passing my pieces, personally I found it very unsatisfactory and if there was any chance of cutting it so fine again I would probably wait till I was better prepared to take the exam.

Personally I'd much rather fail because of poor supporting tests and have good pass marks for pieces than pass with below pass marks for pieces.
It's always the marks and comments for pieces that I most value. For me if they are below standard none of the rest matters.

You'd be surprised. Actual wrong notes can come away with a distinction, even at Grade 8.

Guilty as charged!

And me. I've never managed to get through an exam without a series of bloopers.

...because it's the performance that counts, and you can have a fine, fine performance even if a note or three goes walkabout...

And you can have a pretty dire performance that's technically perfect......

...I've heard a few of those over the years...

They are all over Youtube too, with non-musicians fawning all over them. There is a lovely performance of about grade 2-3 technical demand from a young lad on a flute that is extremely moving and nobody has a nice word to say about him (tried to rectify that), and an entirely wooden production (performance doesn't quite seem the right word) of a young girl playing Flight of the Bumble Bee - the classic "look at me aren't I clever" piece - and everyone thinks she's amazing even though she has a poor tone, no support, breathes in wrong places, poor phrasing, in fact breathes after pretty much every note, intonation is dodgy, stares blankly into the camera... But it's fast, so it must be good.

My Bach fugue was more of a fudge.

This made my chuckle as my daughter was asked to play in front of the school and every piece I suggested was slowish and she said I can't play any of those, they don't know anything about music, I've got to play something fast otherwise they will think I am rubbish!

Perhaps you and Emsoboe should do a skill swap. She has managed full marks on sight reading and a few times on various pieces. Aural is a totally different story Scale marks are usually acceptable but she doesn't make enough effort to get full marks.

This morning I had a lesson with a TG examiner as I wanted to know more about the requirements and expectations with regard to the improvisation option as a supporting test. While talking to her about the TG model of having some choice in supporting tests it suddenly made sense to me.
If it's the playing music that matters why not let supporting tests be just that and give candidates the opportunity of playing to their strengths? I'm not suggesting that what they offer is perfect but that the idea behind makes more sense to me now.
I was told that the TrinityGuildhall mark scheme is deliberately weighted towards pieces and it was pointed out that scoring full marks on pieces would be a pass without attempting anything else.....I don't think that anybody would recommend trying it but the possibility is out there.

Perhaps then, that the AB should consider offering 35 marks for each piece, and 45 altogether for the supporting tests (maybe 15 for each discipline)

I've had at least one pupil who could have passed on pieces alone. It's by no means impossible. (Fortunately she decided on the supporting tests and distinction option .)

Quietly wishing diploma was the same as I suspect I will be taking some resits of the Quick Study

Sight-reading for me... well, either it goes great or it's utterly mashed. Believe it or not my total nemesis time sig is 3/4. I'd rather have 5/8, triplets, duplets, triplets in left hand an duplets in the right, anything other than 3/4, and if it's 3/2 I may as well pack up my viola and quietly leave. I have a mental desire to put a 4th beat in, and in ensemble playing I can quickly get rid of this phantom beat, but alone I find it nigh on impossible to shake off. Now, 3/8 doesn't bother me, so if I remember to tell myself it's like a big version of 3/8 it should work out OK, but if I just see 3/4 and make a mental exit, it's all over. Like my Birmingham audition. Oooooh, car crash!

I understand wanting to put an extra beat in If I see 3/4 then I start singing the blue danube tune to myself to get into the feeling of 3/4 before I even look at the notes.