Someone brought it to my attention the other day, that AB examiners don't necessarily have to play the instrument they are examining!

This shocked me as surely, each instrument has very subtle techniques that only a profficient player in that particular instrument would be able to understand and acknowledge.

Thoughts anyone...?

I made a poll on this a while ago, which you may find interesting to read. I'm sure you'll get some more interesting views on this as well .

Edit: I should emphasise that I mean additional interesting views not more-interesting views .

This is how the AB justify using 'generalist examiners'. Though I do find this article a bit one sided.

Or try a search on specialist examiners and see what comes up.

Thanks for that.

Gosh...given me food for thought...not sure I agree with the AB on this one.

Hmmm...wonder what Trinity do ?

Methinks, more research is necessary

They use specialists, or at least they did before the merger, I don't know the future plans. Incidentally AB specialist diploma examiners are only 'family' specialists e.g. a recorder player can be examined by a flautist or any other woodwind player.

They will use both specialist and generalist examiners.
I think that their specialists are only 'family'specialists too.
As far as I can tell their special visits will have specialist examiners as requested but it seems as though centres might be a bit of pot luck.

I always find that far more worrying than having non-specialists for grade exams - expecting a flautist to have specialised knowledge and understanding when listening to an oboist for example seems a bit dubious.

You think that's bad? My final recital (flute) at the RNCM that was worth 25% of my degree was marked by a tuba player and a clarinetist!!!!!!! We were fuming!

Yes, that's what concerns me.

I find it mind boggling , and unfair to a student who has put all that effort in, to be examined by someone who is not a specialist in that instrument. The examiner may miss an important technique that only e.g. a good flautist would know about.

[/quote]
The examiner may miss an important technique that only e.g. a good flautist would know about.
[/quote]

I think bad technique is much easier to spot than good. Doesn't give much credance(Sp?) to the phrase 'positive marking'.

That's dreadful

I remember playing the first movement of the Lennox Berkeley Sonatina in a music festival when I was a teenager, in a class that was adjudicated by a brass player. He commented that I hadn't attempted the 'flutter tonguing' (there was an alternative given). My flute teacher was sitting in the audience muttering 'double tonguing, double tonguing, doesn't the man know the difference'.

My recorder diploma (teaching) was examined by a pianist and a trumpet player. I was asked some bizarre questions about technique which I realised afterwards were due to the examiners pretending to know something about playing the recorder but not having any idea beyond the normal primary school experience, and some of the comments on the mark form reflected this, too.

I think pianists are at a great disadvantage in their exams, because all the examiners have to be able to play the piano (for aural tests, etc), so they know too much! I had a grade 4 pupil whose mark form said his scales were rather irregular (which they were) ** due to inconsistent fingering **. That is not the comment of someone who is listening purely to the musical side of things as spelt out in the AB blurbs. Fortunately I don't have many piano pupils, and my recorder ones always get much higher marks than I would have given them - I think this is the other side of the same coin. But it does make me hesitate before entering any more pianists for exams. It's a hard enough instrument as it is without being discriminated against.

Sorry to have a bit of a rant - especially since most my pupils seem to do well out of the system.

On the other hand, if everyone was examined by a specialist there would have to be fewer centres / dates available as everyone on the same instrument would have to bunched together. And that would be really hard for minority instruments. So I guess we just have to live with the status quo.

My understanding is that a generalist concerns himself/herself with the final result, not how you got to it. So, it should be perfectly possible for someone to assess a performance on the oboe, say, if they only play the piano because good musicianship will always win through.

Like Alison, I do see some variation between my piano students and oboe students examined by the same examiner on the same day but, particularly for a minority instrument like the oboe it might be hard to find enough candidates to occupy one examiner. Also, I don't know how many specialist oboists there are on the ABRSM panel anyway.

If you go to a concert, you don't sit there questioning the technique of every player - you sit back and assess the musical performance. I have to say, overall, in 30+ years of putting candidates in for ABRSM exams, on average most results have come out where I expected them and I think that's fairly conclusive that the system does work.

Diplomas are rather different territory but I don't enter people very much for those to be able to judge over a wider range of candidates.

At music college, final exams are often divided into a Recital and a separate Technical exam. The recital should be marked purely on musical interpretation. I have friends who have played Grade 5 standard pieces in their final year music college exams but the level of musical interpretation expected was so much higher. Of course, they played technically demanding pieces as well!
Any good musician on any instrument should be able to hear if someone has made a technical error.

Many brass players go through the Guildhall exams because you are examined by a specialist who at least understands the difficulties of the instruments and is likely to be more understanding of gaffs like splitting high notes than a non specialist. I would imagine it's the same with clarinet players and "the break" etc. Also, the Guildhall exams include technical requirements such as a lip slurs, which are very important in brass playing.

I think the examiners go through a reasonable amount of training.......I guess part of that would be that "x" is difficult on a flute...or this is not easily acheived in lower grades on brass instruments.....or at least you would hope so!

I agree thought that when you get to diploma standard thats a different story and you should have a specialist - and at that standard you wouldn't mind a bit of travel would you?

I remember getting a comment like that as a candidate when younger.