Just thought I'd start a new thread on recorder dynamics in the early stages, following on from the digression in a thread in the General Music forum.

To quote Aquarelle:
"How on earth can we make them [the examiners] understand? In fact my Grade 1 and 2 recorder descant and treble recorder players can't normally get any real dynamics out of their instruments without playing either sharp or flat. I do not believe this to be the fault of the player but rather the fact that at the stage where they are playing this is a skill which should not be expected. It is much more important to establish good intonation. One can bring in the musical interest with phrasing and articulation but not with widely differing dynamics at this stage."

I had a conversation with a very senior ABRSM examiner about this not so long ago who said "Oh, but we do hear Grade 1 and 2 recorder players play with differing dynamics, so it IS possible". Subtext: you're just a rubbish teacher.

So it was good to find some kindred spirits on the forum

TG treat this sensibly in their sight-reading. Up to and including grade 5, recorder sight reading is mf and mf only! Once you are at G6, then dynamics start coming in. The sight-reading book even says that this is due to the acknowledged difficulties of dynamics on the recorder.

Of course, whether this translates in to the TG examiners understanding it for any other part of the exam...I can't say, as I've not had a ding for lack of dynamics so far (in all of two exams; the other exams are far too long ago for me to remember!)

As the parent of a recorder player who has also fallen foul to the examiners lack of understanding of recorder dynamics I think it's up to the exam board to educate examiners.

It's not just a problem at the lower grades my daughter's grade 8 was full of lacking in dynamic contrast. It didn't mean there were no dynamics played just that the difference wasn't big enough. In this case the examiner was a singer who had probably never worked with recorders in any situation.

ABRSM should be informing and reminding examiners about the percularities of recorders as part of their on going training. After all they do have quality control.....

I find it hard to believe that examiners are that unaware of the peculiarities of the recorder. It's certainly not the rarest of instruments they have to examine!

'Dynamics' can mean two things. It can simply be about the number of decibels, or a broader term overlapping with timbre and articulation. Translating forte as 'strong' and piano as 'soft' goes some way to explain what I mean.

Not being a recorder player, and not having heard any of the players being discussed here, I can't comment on whether any particular examiner had unreasonable expectations. What I would say, though, is that I talk to violin pupils about how it's possible to have a crescendo or diminuendo without (or prior to) an actual volume change: a change in bow speed and weight can vary the intensity of the timbre, varying the speed and width of vibrato can convey growth or relaxation, and so on. Is it possible that examiners are expecting the dynamics of recorder pieces to be conveyed through features of the playing other than volume?

Possibly - or at least I think so. No one has ever told me this but it's just something that I do - you can help to give an illusion of quieter notes by shortening them a tiny bit ie then the sound is less full - I do this in piano alot (especially in accompanying hand to avoid drowning tune) - it's probably naughty but no examiner has complained so far - does anyone else do this?

I think there are tricks that recorder players can use to give the illusion of more dynamic contrast but they are never going to compare to those produced by other wind instruments or the human voice (don't know much about strings or brass). Sax played properly has a very wide dynamic range every trick in the book won't produce that sort of contrast on recorder.

My daughter's recorder teacher is one of the most respected player/teachers in his field and he holds nothing back in the lessons. She would go a long way to find someone with better teaching skills or more supportive.




If you look at the chart that shows the number of people taking exams the higher level recorder ones are not that common. I think whilst a lot of children play recorder they don't always go down the exam route.

Hi Notmusimum!

Could you tell me where to find the chart please? I thought the ABRSM had stopped publishing that info (that's what they told me when I requested one a few years ago). Have they started again?

Here is a link to the UK stats: http://www.abrsm.org/en/press/factfile/instrument/
International stats can be found linked on the left hand side.

You can 'fake' recorder dynamics with articulation to an extent, e.g. giving a harder attack on a note to make it seem louder. Though you're still not going to get the dynamic range you can get on other instruments.
You can do alternative fingerings but this probably doesn't come in until a higher level of playing; probably if you can do the sort of subtlties of articulation we're talking about, you can learn the alternative fingerings.
Vibrato again isn't something that you'll be doing at lower grades - I'm only really getting the hand of finger vibrato at G7, and the vibrato that comes from inside me I've had very little experience of trying so far.

As I said on another thread, composers may not be of help here - especially the mid 20th century ones. They wrote things during the 'recorder revival' without understanding the instrument. So my list B piece in my last exam (G6) had a pp final note, which was a D above the stave. This note, with the best will in the world, can't be done pp; in the same way, you aren't going to get ff on the bottom notes.
Had the examiner looked over my shoulder at the music I was playing, she may well have commented on the fact that I completely 'ignored' the dynamics - I didn't, I just ignored the impossible ones and put in some that were more reasonable!!

About time these figures were updated and my guess would be that in the last couple of years there are even fewer recorder exams taken. Thoughts based on the decline in school recorder teaching.

My daughter's recorder teacher always insists on giving the (Trinity) examiner copies of daughter's music which is no doubt why daughter was full of trepidation going into her grade 8. That, and the fact that her clarinet teacher (coincidentally an ABRSM examiner) constantly nags her about the immense importance of dynamics. I know daughter went into the exam very concerned that her playing was certainly not going to reflect the multitude of different dynamic markings on one particular piece. All was, however, well. In fact, I cannot recall her ever receiving any comment about dynamics, adverse or favourable, in any of her recorder exams (all Trinity, grades 4,6,7,8).

Nor am I sure what she has been taught (if anything!) about how to produce recorder dynamics that she could not have been taught at an early stage. She doesn't use alternative fingerings and I am not really aware of her ever being taught how to produce different dynamics. Is this just a question of the magical "support" and does this come gradually with time? I suppose it is hard for me to believe that whatever she has been taught could not have been taught equally successfully to someone at Grade 1 or 2 level.

Some of it probably comes down to the recorder as it is perceived and the age of the players! No doubt I could have been taught finger vibrato at a younger age, but I probably wouldn't have had much enthusiasm about French Baroque as a twelve year old. I also only had 15 minute lessons - we were probably more concerned with basics than teaching me four different fingerings for one trill (we were probably lucky if I could get one of them right and consistent). And besides, students are going to learn proper music when they play a proper instrument...

Indeed, but I don't think an examiner should expect a Grade 1 or 2 player to be familiar with them.

Just did some sums on those 2009 statistics: 3.5% of the overall entries were on one or another recorder, but assuming the entries-per-grade translates to those instruments, only one in a thousand entries was grade 7 or 8 recorder....you might have a point that the 'part time' examiners might never encounter them.

One of my pupils got lots of criticism for dynamics in grade 1 recorder (TG) and my own teacher advised I write to the cheif examiner to get their views. The response was basically they want at leat some difference within the bounds of the recorder (eg mf and mp instead of f and p).

The problem for the little ones is that dynamics can compromise tone, and this should also be recognised. I never got these comments for grade 8 or even ATCL but I was experienced enough by that time to deal with the problems.

But isn't this equally an issue for a beginner clarinettist, say? I just wonder if we recorder players do protest too much...?

I totally agree and in our case daughter was Grade 7 before she was taught by someone with enough recorder knowledge to be able to guide her.




There is probably some truth in that for all wind instruments but maybe examiners are more used to dealing with beginner clarinets/oboes/flutes. Dynamics are also slightly easier to produce on those instruments.

I mentioned recently on another thread about hearing people with a "squashed" sax sound. Several people seemed to know what i meant. I know some of the people had passed Grade 8 with Distinction but there was no way they were using the full dynamic range/tonal contrast of the instrument. The dynamics produced were still larger than you would get on recorder.

Not nearly to the extent of recorder. That's before you consider examiners greater experience with clarinettists as well.

I suppose this is an inherent problem with having non-specialist examiners. I believe they're not supposed to comment on technique, but of course the issue of dynamics isn't seen as a technique as such.

Indeed, all dynamics and other markings are optional in the examination provided that an appropriate musical outcome is managed. If the dynamics written in the piece don't suit the instrument then scrub 'em out. Better to show dynamic contrast in a different place rather than not at all. The music is usually happy with growing towards the higher notes, which does recorders a favour. At higher grades the player can use techniques to put less air through whilst still producing reasonably quiet notes, but that's advanced stuff. If it's impossible then don't do it, but put in something else so that contrast can be shown. The sight-reading is more difficult, and if huge dynamic contrasts appear on early grade recorder sight reading then there is something wrong.

I have had positive comments from examiners on dynamics for three of the four exams I've taken on recorder, and negative from one, all of them high-level. I would say this - it's worth while teachers beginning the process of teaching implication of dynamic from the earliest stages - and that's really not so difficult to do, since it is the difference between short and longer tonguing - dit or doo, they produce notes whcih sustain less or more, and thereby make the listener hear different volumes. It's an important part of recorder technique. The three positive commentators? One recorder player and teacher (I am relieved I didn't know this til after the event), one clarinettist, and one organist. The negative one? someone who doesn't teach all that much but when they do, it's choir training, mainly. Now okay, the negatives also came for the exam I did least well in, and the highest-level one, but also from the one person in the line-up who might not know what it is to try to create dynamics from an inflexible bit of tubing.

Just out of interest, does anyone know if little grade one violinists get as much criticism for their intonation? Or indeed, come to that, grade 8 ones?

'Optional' is stretching it a bit, as the regulations say: "Candidates may use their discretion regarding indications or markings (particularly editorial) in the music - e.g. metronome marks, fingering, bowing, phrasing, the interpretation of ornaments, etc. - which need not be strictly observed." (My bolding). They don't actually mention printed dynamic markings at all.


By the same reasoning, grade 1 violin sightreading shouldn't include forte or piano markings, because an 1/8-size instrument simply can't make big enough contrasts?


Yes, and yes particularly in scales. Sometimes examiners slightly overdo it with the earlier grades, but for obvious reasons they're generally very familiar with how accurate they can expect intonation to be at different stages of learning the instrument, and so know when to avoid commenting on slips which are obviously due to nerves or sweaty hands rather than lack of technique or aural awareness.

Aha, in which case, it's possible we recorder players might be being a little too sensitive at times? Put a grade 8 recorder player with an ensemble of strings at the same grade, and you'll probably find the recorder better in tune* and with more consistent tone, and the strings with better dynamic range, on average.

*the strings will tell you the recorder is flat. It's not. They're sharp

*runs*

I do teach alternative fingerings to my Grade 1 and 2s in specific places. It makes them feel very grown up And different articulations should be possible for players of all levels. (I seem to be arguing on the other side now )

I do have issues with the Time Pieces books which have a whole lot of impossible dynamics marked in for the early grade pieces. I think it is always good to adjust these on the music just in case the examiner takes a look at it. Which reminds me - I had an examiner once who after every piece jumped up and looked at the music. After accompanying several Grade 1 pupils curiosity got the better of me and I asked him what he was looking at. He said... (guess what) ... Dynamics!

My complaint was really about a Grade 2 interpretation of "To a wild rose" which was played with as much dynamic range as one could expect at that Grade. After all, you don't expect a Grade 1 pianist to thump out a triple forte for more than the odd one note at the low end of the piano at the end of a dramatic little piece.

My candidate was criticised for not having a wide enough dynamic range. This criticism was, in my view totally unjustified and the examiner obviously didn't know what a treble recorder can and can't do. Of course you can use some tricks to get variety into the playing but asking for a wide dynamic range is not on in the early grades. Or perhaps Grade 1 pianisists should be asked to legato pedal and violinists to double stop. There are things that are appropriate to each grade and each instrument and I think they should be taken into account in the training of examiners.

I don't think it would be feasible or even desirable to have specialist examiners. In terms of numbers it simply couldn't be done. But I do think that in their training examiners should be given some guidance on what to expect from the various instruments.

If I might come back in on the violin question - a music teaching friend of mine had her young son criticised for not producing a rich enough tone. His intonations was OK but the sound, said the examiner wasn't full enough. He was playing a half size violin. I am not a string player but I imagine that you can't get such a rich tone from a small violin as from a full size instrument. Correct me if I am wrong.

Again, the usual caveats about not having heard the player in question...but examiners are very familiar with hearing 1/2-size violins, and know what can and can't be expected from them. It's certainly possible that his tone really wasn't as good as it could have been, and it's not unusual for a confident strong young player to become more inhibited in a strange environment.

There probably is some sensitivity at play, yes. We all know the foibles of our own instrument.
Recorder players tend to know how they are regarded (well, the adult ones), or if not how we are actually regarded, how we think people regard us. We also know, or rather believe, people don't understand the instrument at all. So, a criticism levelled at dynamics is 'far more likely' to be about the criticiser's ignorance that the criticisee's dynamics Especially in the case of examiners, who as the numbers show don't get to see all that many recorder players (although if the numbers are roughly 1 in 1000 examinees are higher grade recorder players - how long does it take the average examiner to examine 1000 people? How frequently will they get their 1000th examinee?)

If you are not aware yourself of how recorder might be seen there is always someone who will come along and inform you. We heard the comments about recorder not being a proper instrument and how anyone can play recorder. This from someone who recently won a prize for academic music

Thankyou for the stats info Maisie and Notmusimum - much obliged!