Hi everyone,

I'm from looking for an university in England, and I'm not sure if it's impossible to get in (like ones in America). So... for those of you who are familiar with the UK school system, please answer my questions!

I've done the dip. abrsm for piano performance. Where does that place me?

Should I go to Lancaster Uni for BA in music?

Where can I get an actual music performance BMUS degree?



Please if you know anything else about anything that has to do with college, reply =]

Not many universities offer a BMus in performance - if you want a performance qualification you would be better applying to a music college. Why a BMus rather than a BA or a Graduate Diploma?

Hello des

isn't Bmus better than BA? it's more specific. At least that's how it is in the U.S.

Ummm I'm not familiar with music colleges. Are they 4 year colleges?
Besides, I wish to double major. And my piano skills must not be as good as others... why would they want to admit an international student rather than a local student? There wouldn't be an initiative for them to accept me unless I'm super good.

I think you should apply to a Conservatoire. You will take a BA (Hons) in Performance. (4 years) All you will do is music in the instrument of your choice - piano. Occasionally students present two or even three instruments , all of which require a high standard of proficiency. There is no 'minor' subject in a Conservatoire. All you do is Music period. There are no academic modules to take. However if you are a singer you have to take some language classes.

The Conservatoires are familiar with International students, particularly the London Conservatoires and ALL students are considered on their application and audition. There is no fixed allocation for 'home' students. However it is extremely competitive but if you already have your diploma then you are certainly at a sufficiently high standard to apply for a place. To do so, apply through CUKAS. The Conservatoires in the UK are:

Royal College of Music,
Royal Scottish Academy of Music and Drama,
Royal Welsh College of Music and Drama,
Birmingham Conservatoire,
Trinity College of Music and Drama
Leeds College of Music
Royal Northern College of Music

Another conservatoire is the Royal Academy of Music

The Universties can have a mix of Music and other such as Music and French etc. as well as straight music. You apply for a place at those through UCAS.

You should look at/Study carefully the individual websites of all the Conservatoires and the Universities you hope to apply to e.g. some offer the opportunity to spend some time in Europe, e.g. Vienna, Paris or Berlin, studying with other professors.

PS Most students to conservatoires have some idea of the professor they wish to study with and use this to assist with the decision of where they would like to study

Good Luck

If you're super-hardcore some conservatoires run joint schemes with universities - the RNCM allows you to study a degree course at Manchester Uni as well as your college course if you can prove you're capable.

A BMus is not "better" than a BA, technically they have the same weight but I suppose some employers would look upon one more favourably than another - I don't know whether it makes much difference though.

If you are already attending school in the U.S., I think you would be much better off continuing your tertiary education there.

You said that you had completed the DipABRSM diploma, and on other thread, you said that you were preparing Bartok's Third Piano Concerto for a competition. Are you currently in high school? Are you attending a high school that specializes in arts right now?

If you are interested in getting a BMus degree and at the same time, majoring in a non-music discipline, I can think of several schools that suit you, provided that you have excellent musical and academic abilities:

1) Juilliard/Columbia University
2) Oberlin College
3) Eastman School of Music/University of Rochester

These institutions offer five-year BA and BMus programmes for highly qualified students, so you earn two undergraduate degrees by staying an extra year.

I don't believe American schools admit students based on their nationalities.

Lancaster is poorly regarded as a Uni to study musi at, you woould be much better applying to either Huddersfield or York if you want to do a Performance based music degree.

However, I agree with the previous poster, and suggest you try for somewhere like the Juliard School, if you must come to the UK the places to consider are the RNCM/Manchester Uni Joint Course, The Royal Academy of Music and the Royal College of Music.

I wouldn't even apply to any of the others given you are already preparing pieces the standard or the Bartok Third Concerto at High School Level.

Really Huddersfield isn't known at all any more except for modern music and music technology, as far as classical performance go it's not on the map at all, and York isn't that high up for performance although it does have a top academic course.
The places which seem to attract the most serious musicians aside from conservatoires are Manchester Uni, Kings College London, Oxford, Cambridge, Birmingham Uni, Royal Holloway. All these except Oxbridge have some kind of scheme in place to give free lessons at conservatoires to top students and they all do joint courses as well so you could do Music and another subject if you wanted. I would strongly recommend looking at Kings London who have links with RAM and Manchester who are linked to RNCM. Having applied to universities and music colleges this year these were the two which seem significantly above any others when it comes to taking performance seriously.
But if you want performance you must go to conservatoire really - the ones you will find on CUKAS as well as RAM and Guildhall who have their own system for admissions. They're not impossible to get into but it's difficult, certainly, not least because of the number of non-UK students who apply now which pushes the standard up.


Not to be rude but that is very close minded and an opinion which went out generally about 10 years ago. Guildhall, RSAMD and Trinity turn out some exceptional pianists. The best pianist and musician I know was at Guildhall. The Welsh also seems to be doing good things esp in the piano dept. I wonder if you slightly underestimate how high the standard for pianists is at these places as they have become such international institutions pulling in the very best pianists from all over the world. I bet a lot of 1st years at Juilliard have played concertos of that level to a high standard, and probably so have some who got rejected.

It makes very little difference where you end up especially as a pianist, in so far as the one factor which will make more difference than anything else is the teacher you end up with - whether you're being taught somewhere with Royal in the name is neither here nor there. Being snobby about conservatoires is really stupid as the current opinion amoungst recent graduates and current students I know seems to be that it's where you do your masters that counts, and for undergrad the only important things to consider are teachers, opportunities for performance, and the atmosphere of the place (work ethic included...). I guess this is even more true for pianists than orchestral musicians.

Hudds. was known for new music even when I was there, but has some Early music specialists on its teaching staff, and a specialist performers course. It regularly gets people onto good post-grad courses, especially in performers.

I wrote my dissertation on the Baroque as the Head of Musicology specialised in Handel... hardly Avant Garde!

I deliberately missed out Oxbridge as their courses are more academic even though the opportunities to perform are immense. Missing out the Guildhall was an oversight.

I wonder how long ago that was. I know some years ago it was good but it is considered nowadays to be a second or third rate course for classical music and isn't seriously considered by anyone seeking a career primarily as a performer or academic musician. Things change I'm afraid, and your views seem to be a little out of date if you don't mind me saying so - for someone considering coming from the US to the UK and playing at a high level the idea of applying to Huddersfield is rather laughable.

I think their requirement of grade C in A level Music rather speaks for itself, and that they require only BBC overall.

As someone who has researched this for my own purposes this year I can say this with certainty, and none of my contemporaries who are decent musicians would consider applying there if indeed they have even heard of it. It really is only good for pop/technology music courses.

Bohemian, at least one of my contemporaries is a Conductor with many orchestral recordings on the Naxos label, regularly broadcast on Radio 2 and 3, and considered an expert in his field.

Another, having studied her Phd at Manchester is on the teaching staff at Bristol.

Another has done a lot of work with the National Youth Choir and has recorded with York Waits. Another is a solo Soprano who has performed at the Proms.

Those are the ones I know about. Even those who make it to Conservertoires are not guaranteed performance careers.

I regularly visit one of my Contemporaries who balances a job with the Somerset County Music Service with his position as an Alto Vicar Choral at Wells Cathedral, perfoming as a soloist with Local Choral Societies. He too has recordings to his name.

I am quite happy teaching and performing locally. It fits in with family life. Given the numbers of Music Graduates who become accountants, at least I still work with my degree subject.

And when one of the Rose Consort of Viols and a leading Handelian are on the teaching staff, there is more to Huddersfield than Pop, Contemporary Music, and Music Tech.

I agree, sorry Jod. I've been over to see some concerts in Huddersfield and the standard does seem pretty low. I agree that York is not a great performance course - we have some fantastic performers here, but they are in the minority. I would say that music college really is the way to go - I'm not sure how they compare against each other, but the big names and all the london colleges are all worth investigating

That's just great.
If you had maybe bothered to read my post, I quite clearly pointed out that while once upon a time a generation or two ago Huddersfield was OK for Music, nowadays it simply is not a competitor. People applying this decade for top universities will not be interested in Huddersfield because it is not a good university and does not have a good classical music course. You can keep going on about how great it was back in the day but that's completely irrelevant to the point of this thread. It's nice that you clearly enjoyed your time there but would you care to mention when you actually graduated?


Compare their staff to any of the unis I mentioned. Huddersfield are not even in the same league, nor quite clearly do they attempt to be. Are you seriously claiming that a university requiring grade C music is as good as Manchester, Kings, York, Oxbridge etc in terms of either academics or performance?

Even 20 odd years ago Huddersfield was not one of the "top" places. It was a polytechnic then; the offers they made were considerably lower (in terms of A levels) than Universities and performance standards were lower than for Conservatoires. One of my friends went to Huddersfield (and enjoyed it and is now a violin teacher) but it was not initially her first choice. She was rejected by the London colleges and didn't have good enough A levels for a University.

Thank you Keri. Indeed it was a Poly when I was there, but in saying that it was one of the best polys in the country in a number of fields.

You can go to the best music department in the country, perform badly and go nowhere, or go to a friendly department where you fit in, excel and end up still using your degree 17 years after you graduated.

A number of people who were there were Royal Northern rejects who were advised to go there and see where were when it was time to do a post grad qualification. A number got into the Royal Colleges for their post grad years. I certainly got a well-rounded musical education.

Sure Birmingham, Manchester, Durham, Kings London, Oxford and Cambridge have a lot of good tutors, but when I applied for my degree I looked at the course structure and tried to work out which would suit me best.

I have never regretted the decision. Also I do not see having a CNAA degree as inferior. It was scrutinised and verified to the Nth degree to mean that the Grading I got, ie an upper second class degree, really was what it stood for.

Didn't there used to to be a seperate school of music in Huddersfield or am I getting mixed up?

Yes there did, it was on its last legs during the last years as a poly.

I seems Des from what you have said, that I was lucky, I went there when it was a Poly, and it offered an excellent course. Some people look doen on Polys, but in the late 1980s the best of the Polytechnics were turning out some very good graduates. Unfortunately, turning them all into Universities has been a bit of a disaster. As I said before, my CNAA degree was checked, verified and scruitnised by so many external academics, my external singing examiner was from the RNCM, for example, that I know I the class of degree I got was a good degree.

There still are some excellent staff there, but when I went to visit with the view to do a taught masters, my previous tutor did say they are now awarding more third class degrees, he also said that the number of firsts were up too. How much this is due to student attitudes and application, I dont know, so the poor performance may have been from the students destined to do badly.

I have about 5/6 friends on my course this year who graduated from Huddersfield, doing classical music, and most of them are doing a course which is half run by the RNCM. Are you telling me that they're not decent musicians just because they didn't go to Oxbridge?! Not everyone is going to be the next Maxim Vengerov or whoever and get into a music college or Oxbridge for undergrad. In relation to the original poster's question, then yes, Oxbridge/music colleges are probably the best route but just because you're 'too good' to go to somewhere that's not those places, does not mean they're awful, because my friends are NOT awful musicians. The 'best' performers may end up at music college, but I hate this attitude that seems to go around music college and Oxbridge people that if you don't go there then you're worth no salt as a musician. It's nonsense and I'm sorry if you think that.

I'm not saying that Huddersfield or any other uni you want to categorise in the 'not good enough for me' list, is in the same league as Oxbridge, but the people that go to these other universities are not rubbish just because they do not want all the attention that comes with a professional performing career.

I have no doubt you will get an offer and scholarship from every single institution you have applied to bohemian, but just because some universities are not going to get you on the RAH stage does not mean they're not worth looking into for other people. I agree that the OP perhaps should be looking at music colleges, and I apologise if that is what you were solely refering to, but I've seen too many negative attitudes about uni's than aren't Oxbridge to just let peole slag off places.

I went to Bangor. No doubt you'd spout out the same opinions about that too, but if I had had an offer from Oxbridge, would I have gone? No is the answer, because it's not the route I wanted. Does that make me a rubbish musician? Evidently.

No, I think Oxbridge is a pretty poor choice for someone who wants to be a performer, especially a pianist, and I think someone of the standard of the original poster should be aiming quite significantly higher than Huddersfield or, indeed, all but 2 or 3 universities if he/she intends to come all the way to the UK and pay £12,000 per year for their education. I know some pretty poor musicians from Oxbridge. It's an academic course and takes the best academic musicians with little regard for their performing skills or potential.


Of course it was because unlike you and jod I am trying to discuss the topic in hand rather than boost your egos. Also, if you want to go and read my post properly you will see that the unis I was suggesting as being top for performance are not Oxbridge - but Manchester, Birmingham, KCL etc. Personally I would pick any of these 3 over Oxbridge any day, speaking as someone who intends to end up as a performer.
If you want to generalise about peoples' attitudes to your university, maybe this isn't the best place to do it.


Gosh, you seem to have developed something of a complex about it. You clearly made it work for you, which is lovely, but do you honestly think you would have gone there if you'd been playing pieces considered complex even by music college audition standards in year 12? We are MEANT to be discussing what is a good option for the original poster, not whether your own choice of university was any good. That's irrelevant.

I'm fully aware that it's the original poster's question that needs to be addressed. I was merely picking up on the attitude I felt you had that was, for any musician, anything other than music college, Oxbridge, Manchester etc (I'm not listing them all just to make you happy) isn't good enough and makes us rubbish musicians. THAT is what I took offence to and quite frankly has nothing to do with boosting an ego. Where you get that from I have no idea! I said in my previous post that if it was just the OP you were referring to about music colleges and so on then many apologies, but you seemed to have ignored that. I've said that I agree Huddersfield et al wouldn't be the best place to go for a pianist wanting to perform. Was that needed to be said more than once in my post? I have read your posts and some of it refers to the OP and other times you have said exactly what I quoted in my previous post, that no decent musician would go anywhere other than blah blah blah. I'm interested as to how many people you're now saying aren't decent musicians!

No, I know that for some people with more specialist interests or at a different stage in their career may do better elsewhere, but throughout I have been discussing what is best for the original poster or indeed anyone else in his/her position. For someone at that level, I'm sure you agree that music college or possibly a top performance based uni is best. I honestly don't care how good you think Bangor is (actually I would rate Bangor as a uni for certain people, it has a reputation for helping students progress a lot in 3 years from what I hear) or anywhere else and I don't have any particular idea that only rubbish musicians go there or to similar unis - if you wish to promote it and others like it then great, but start a new thread rather than talking about it in one debating options for a high level performer.


ALL of it refers to the original poster actually, it just so happens that I was in a similar position a few months back and so can speak from personal research as well. Of course music college isn't best for some people, if they have strong academic interests or less performance ability when applying, and likewise the unis I mentioned aren't ideal for certain people either, but they are the best places to go for those who are aiming for a performance-based career and are of the standard when they apply. I was under the impression that this was the topic in hand.
You get some crappy performers at Oxbridge and crappy academic musicians at music college. You also get the best academic musicians at Oxbridge (+similar) and the best performers at music college, with a few exceptions who decide to go elsewhere for whatever reason. And sure people change in terms of ability during their degree, but as far as applying goes, this would suggest that probably the majority of the best performers, and I would guess the original poster is within this category, do go to music college - they exist for a reason, to train performers. Agree? Or would you care to twist this into "bohemian thinks Bangor is a dump" as well?

Frankly I'm more confused than ever. haha. But it seems to me that the conclusion is if i'm a performer, I should go to music college, and if I'm an academic musician (or however you wanna call it) I should go to other universities that are not just for music.

You actually have a better chance of getting a place as an international student, as you would pay a lot more in fees to the college itself as opposed to a local student. I would advise you to audition for the UK music colleges as they are amongst the best in the world.

For goodness sake . I said what I said and you've given your reasons, why try to get yet another reaction?! I give up.

I'm very interested by the contrast in views between someone who hasn't yet been thru higher education and those who have. I wonder if it is possible that those who have yet to go thru higher education will change their opinion once they have experienced it?

Thank you Scaramouche for bringing some rationality to this debate. Before anyone passes judgement on her musicality, though I have not heard her play, I have heard several musicians whose opinions I would trust descibe her as an excellent saxophonist, and the rigours of the University of Wales degree course would challenge many a less a mortal.

It appears her opinion of recent Huddersfield Alumni is similar to mine. It's greatest strength is the Contemporary music festival, wher I had the privilage to steward, page turn and do othe front of house duties that guarenteed me free entry to many concerts... and that was for a student who was specialising in Baroque music!

The composition department always needed performers, well that certainly kept me on my toes, as some of the pieces I was asked to sing were specifically composed for my range, and did some pretty crazy things, all at a time when I was writing up my dissertation. Then there were the masterclasses. Big names, and as a fast reader of music, I was popular choice of page turner. I think I learnt more about playing the piano turning pages for the Berg Piano Sonata than I did in lessons!

Like Scaramouche I had a balanced musical education, but in an establishment you describe as second-rate. Yet statisically in the year groups surrounding mine a significant number of performers have made it.

I would not have liked to have read music as an undergraduate at Oxbridge. Now nearing 40, should I have the time, the Cambridge taught Mphil course in Historical Musicology would be a possibility, but I have two children and a teaching job, and a disability to work around, and I've learnt that I can't have it all... yet.

I wish Scaramouche all the best on her current course knowing that when she succeeds that her success will be a catalyst for a new generation of fine musicians.

So we're talking 20 odd years ago? For the final time, I don't give a damn how good it was back then and it's totally irrelevant to the purpose of this thread, but in this century I don't think it's at all inaccurate, having researched it and knowing current undergrads, to call it a 2nd league university for music after a top level of maybe 15-20 unis (in which I suppose Bangor would sit). For music technology however, I know Huddersfield is easily in the top 5 in the country.

If you want to discuss how things stand now, and not write about the past and how good Huddersfield was when you were there (which I don't doubt at all), that would be great. Otherwise, do PM me if you ever do the amount of research on current undergrad music courses that I have over the past 2 years and are still of the opinion that Huddersfield is a top music dept, particularly for someone in the position of the original poster. Then maybe we can have a sensible discussion. Clearly at the current moment in time, we're not able to do that as you seem to have some problem with the fact that a possibly once-good music department has changed into a top music technology dept and a less good classical dept. I think that shows progress, if in a slightly unorthodox way. You seem to disagree. So there we shall leave it.

For the last time boehemian, you know nothing about the musical abilities of either scaramouche or myself. You have not heard her play the sax and you have not heard me sing.

And please we are not talking about twenty years ago, I am not that old! I am still in contact with my alma mater, and can honestly say that with the brand new arts building, I hardly think its going downmarket.

To judge a University by its true colours not only do you need to look at the course, but also the quality of its tutors, both Bangor and Huddersfield score well in that department.

Conservertoires serve their purpose, but at the end of the day how many of their graduates become great performers. My son's God mother is ex Royal College, and along with her twin sister does have an international career, but not many of her year do.

As I said, I can't be bothered to communicate with someone so close-minded any more (referring soley to jod here, not scaramouche). Keep talking about yourself if you like, or you could even refer to the original point of the thread if you felt like doing something useful instead of just badmouthing people and putting words into their mouth.

Get real Bohemian, you are only auditioning for conservertoire places, you have not suffered carping and criticing from those who think they can do better, what I call the worst side of studying music. Not every music student is sweetness and light! (BTW, I was one of the more supportive)

The number of people who make it is really small. This is not jaundiced this is a reality check.

Refering back to the OP, providing you have the performance presence to compliment your technique, you sound as if you would suit any of the Royal Schools, of the Guildhall very well, and if you want an academic course to, look at the joint Course between Manchester and RNCM, but beware this is really demanding (the members of the Brodsky String Quartet studied this and stressed how difficult it was)

However with an educational establishment such as the Giuliard in New York, and several Ivy League Universities all offering excellent music degrees, why come to the UK?

I find it hard to believe that you are capable of being supportive. Your comment is irrelevant to this thread and completely unfounded and unnecessary. This thread isn't about you or me jod, please stop making it into a petty argument that no-one else (including myself) has any real interest in. Given that you're twice my age, you could try to act more like it from time to time.

And FYI, it's called Juilliard.

That would be my suggestion for lilpep4ever. I can't understand why she would want to go to the UK when she's already studying in the US. Her teachers (both academic and music) would be far more familiar with the schools in the US than those in the UK.

But I must also add that, haven't never heard her play, I can't say if she would be good enough for a place at top conservatories such as Juilliard. For piano, Juilliard requires two rounds of auditions--recording and then a live audition (by invitation only). Basically, if you were not already performing major concertos with an orchestra by your early teens, then don't even consider going there.

The music programmes at most Ivy League schools are liberal-arts-oriented, sort of like the music programmes at Oxbridge. Some schools may allow students to take private lessons at additional cost, but the emphasis is on the academic side. The Columbia-Juilliard joint programme is an exceptional case.

US universities that offer a conservatory-type education include Indiana, Eastman (part of University of Rochester), Cincinnati, and Michigan.

If anyone was interested in studying Music in the USA there's a board called College Confidential which has a music major forum.

As with most higher education in the US there are many more good music conservatorys than the obvious ones. These may or may not be at the standard of Juillard or some of the British conservatoires but include ones at University of North Texas, Vanderbilt University, Oberlin College and Johns Hopkins University. As there is no central admissions like UCAS or CUKAS the difference between a conservatoire style music degree and a British university style music degree is that the former will usually be a BM (Bachelor of Music) and the latter a BA (Bachelor of Arts).

Btw the above has been gleaned from reading several threads at College Confidential and is by no means definitive.

Bohemian, I'm really sorry, but carry on like this, and I'm going to have to report you. You are being wholly inappropriate towards people who are simply offering an opinion.

I believe Huddersfield was originally mentioned in reply to the original question as it is one of the few Universities that offers a BMus course. As does Surrey, and a number of others. I am a Hudds graduate (BMus in 2002 and MMus in 2008), but although I can admit that it has it's less attractive aspects, I found the course functional and worthwhile, with a number of eminent performers, composers and researchers on it's staff.

In relation to the original post... you'll be seen as an international student if you're from anywhere outside the UK. Also, if you want to do a puely performance based course, you might want to look at a conservatoire, although many Unis allow you to specialise to a lesser or greater extent. Wherever you study, the world of music is a cut throat one. Students from universities frquesntly do as well as those from conservatoires, and quite honestly, success is often about being in the right place at the right time, as much as it is about where you study... I teach now, and play on a freelance basis. As many of my conservatoire graduating friends are teaching as are my uni friends.

I know the grass is always greener, but I'd stay in the US!

Please, Bohemian, calm down, or bow out.

To be fair, bohemian has been trying to post in relation to the original topic. I've just re-read the thread and it seems clear to me that people have misinterpreted her advice and taken it personally when it was not her intention to offend. OK, perhaps some of us would have responded to others' comments less bluntly in the end but trying to have a discussion when parties are at cross-purposes can be infuriating!

Of everything I've read in this thread, this is probably the most very accurate comment of all (some would argue the *only* accurate comment ).

Of the people with whom I was at university (which, like jod and violoboist's alma mater, was a former polytechnic so obviously not worthy of consideration ) many have gone on to successful musical careers. Several of my contemporaries teach, either in the classroom or privately, one runs the education department of a well-known London concert venue, and one works full-time as a conductor - and that's just the ones I know about. Conversely, the wife of a friend studied singing at a highly-regarded conservatoire and now earns most of her income from alternative therapies rather than music.

As for which university, that depends on your requirements. Do you want to specialise in a particular area, e.g. performance, a historical discipline, technology? How important is the location? (I found being close to London great for accessing live performance).

In any case, what you've done soon passes where you studied in terms of importance. If only someone had told me that at 18 <sigh>.

Spot on. Wise words indeed, Deborah...

Did I say something useful?!


I wasn't necessarily having a go at Bohemia... as I've explained to her, I don't log on here to see people arguing- I do recognise that there were two parties involved. Boehmia has yet to experience HE, apart from her applications process, and people will always support their own uni or college, if that's where they had a good time.

I hope my previous post went some way towards answering the question.

It does make me cross though that former polys are put down as being 2nd rate institutions... there is surely a reason for them being 'graduated' to universities. Furthermore, league tables can be misleading- yes, Hudds didn't make it up very far, but it's number of five star ratings does outstrip many other institutions...

I do wish people would carefully consider how their tone affects what they are writing. it would be unfortunate if such a thing were to colour opinions.

I didnt think anyone was arguing! Just forumites; Agree or disagree!

I went to a Poly and it was regularly met with a tiny sneer for the subsequent 4 years after graduation. I was supposed to be Oxbridge material but 30+ years ago I decided to have "fun" during my A levels and barely scraped passes, so only a Poly would take me. I was grateful at the time and got my degree not because of the staff but because of the solid foundation that my secondary school had given me. The teachers at the Poly were just not up to standard and most of the time they were on strike. Even on the day of graduation there was a strike! There was my mother was all done up in her best hat (This was the 70s) and we were told to go home because the staff were on strike! (My dad's face silently read "well what do you expect from a Poly?!" And they spelt my name wrong on the Certificate! And wanted to charge me £50 to correct it!

Not until I did my Masters at a Russell University, coupled with teaching abroad, could I finally merit a decent wage and get pass the tiny sneers at interviews.

Now same Poly is a well respected University, but looking back at the time it did not provide good teaching. I should have resat my A levels and gone to a University where the teaching and reseach was of a much better standard.

Today, All students/parents are paying fees and as such the investment is paramount in mind, so the research for a University providing good facilities, with excellent faculty staff is taken far more seriously.

You mention surveys/league tables. However a student at a particular institution can only answer questions about the place where they currently are. ONLY if they managed to attend another institution i.e transfer to another place before graduating, can they give a reasonable honest comparative answer to the many surveys.

E.g. A student at X University may think her place is brilliant for say tea & coffee facilities and the staff excellent, the library adequate, but when visiting her brother at place Y for about a week, finds that the tea & coffee facilities is superior, the staff give more hand outs, the library is open longer and is staffed by a friendlier knowledgeable person. Or same if she transfer to another University after a year and finds that hmm, the grass is not greener on that side of the fence.

Most students think that their institution is great. But what are they comparing it with? Please loyalty is great but let it not make us blinkered to the fact that some Universities are like schools, not very good, and that some League table results can be 'massaged'.

Absolutely- League tables should always be accompanied by thorough research...

It's worth pointing out that Hudds was made into a Uni long ago, and even as a poly, it had a separate school of music, where my teacher and her husband (both BBC Scottish Orchestra and later Manchester Camerata) went. That's by the by, and CLEARLY, I'm going to stand up for the institution where I had my formative years.

There is always going to be a discussion about uni vs college, and whenever I see the topic come up, I cringe, and wish people had done a topic search, rather than lstarting it all again.

Ultimately, what matters is my BMus, and my MMus, NOT where I got them. Although, I am qualified to comment on comparisons, because I DID also graduate from another institution...

sometimes people still think conservatoires students perform much better than uni students...

i don't particularly support my own uni, in fact, i have a rather love-hate relationship at where i'm studying at the moment. i love my friends (music or not), but should have gone to a music college instead of university (i realised that in my second year). oh well, i still have 6 months to go before i graduate, then off to college in september next year.