Is there a difference?

There's been plenty of discussion on this topic on the boards. In a nutshell, BA Music tends to be more highly academically biased, where a BMus is biased towards the practical performance aspects.

I disagree. A BMus at my university meant that all my modules were in Music. A BA allowed you to take some modules in other subjects but with most of the focus on music - especially in the final year.

Or if you go to Manchester Uni you can be different to everyone else and get a MusB

Not true. There are plenty of places which offer a BMus which have a mostly academic course, and vice versa. The difference is purely historical (ie. what the university senate felt like offering back whenever they started offering a music degree).

If you go to City, you get a BSc!

Yeah, thanks, Bing! Are you trying to wind people up or what? What you have written is demonstrably untrue - arrant nonsense, in fact. As you are working for an MMus, I might have hoped you would check your facts more thoroughly.

Helen ( BMus, as it happens. Surprise)

The BMus / BA performance/academic thing is probably true on average (a higher proportion of BA courses are academic) but there are so many exceptions that it's not very helpful.

If you want to know what a course is like read the prospectus. Otherwise as long as in full it's *Bachelor of something*, it's at the same level as a BA or a BMus or a BSc.

Absolutely! Excellent reply. Much of the lettering comes from the faculty that are awarding the degree. My university has a music faculty (not a department), so therefore awarded a BMus. They also awarded an MMus for postgrad students. The university I did my second degree at had a music department, so therefore I got an MA, rather than an MMus. As it happens, it was possible to to the BMus I did with no performance modules for finals if you wished to do so.