hi,
i am not a teacher,but a violin (mature) student. I would like to ask some teachers about the differences in
difficulty with regard to examinations, particuarly the trinity board of music. Looking at a trinity music book for grades 1-8 and the sight reading tests, they do appear much easier than the associated board ( and there is no aural!) (I really hate singing and wish to play the violin, not sing ever). The sight reading tests are much easier, indeed i have just finished grade 2, but for practise have worked my way through the grade 4 sight reading tests in the trinity book (which appear to be the same standard as grade 2 in the assciated board). Even the pieces are easier to do and shorter. I'm not complaining, as i would rather attain my grades with the associated board and play the violin to a good standard and feel a sense of great achievment etc. But, i simply cannot understand the differences in quality (if that's the correct word). Please could someone explain this to me. Also, what differece does it make if you cannot sing in tune, surely it is the violin playing that counts with good intonation etc. Who cares if i can sing or not!

thankyou

Hi Debra,

Trinity no longer exists as an exam board, although some of their resources are still floating around (e.g. I recently worked through one of their old flute sightreading books). They have merged with the old Guildhall exam board to form Trinity Guildhall and the syllabi and resources from the old boards are now a couple of years out of date. Have a look on the 'Trinity College London' website which has the information about Trinity Guildhall music exams.

I have just done grade 7 flute with TG and having looked through the things from both boards (TG and AB) and talked to other people, I don't think it's a case of one board being easier than the other. They are simply different. The mark scheme for TG is much more rigid and, as it's marked out of 100 not 150, each mark is worth a lot more and (from what other people have said) is also harder to gain. I would dispute your assertion that the pieces are 'shorter and easier' because there are pieces which are listed for one grade by TG and then at a higher grade for AB (and vice versa) - e.g. Clarke 'Sunstreams' is on the grade 7 TG list but the grade 8 AB one. Within any grade there is usually some variation in the pieces (regardless of the board) and a higher standard of performace would be expected for some pieces if they are otherwise less demanding from a technical point of view - plus some pieces will be 'easier' for some students and other pieces will be easier for others. It's also worth bearing in mind that 'easy' pieces are often easy to play in terms of the actual notes, but are difficult to play well - Mozart's concertos are a good example of this.

I think that AB do give you the option of playng responses for the aural instead of singing them. Someone else can probably give more information about this.

Edit: Sorry, just noticed that this is posted in teachers. I think what I've said above is okay but am sure people who are teachers will correct it if I'm wrong.

It depends in part just how averse you really are to singing - I hate it but it wasn't my reason for going for Trinity exams - my big bugbear is the scales. Singing is such a tiny part of the ABRSM exam that if you favour the syllabus, you could still make a good grade with AB even if your singing were atrocious (it is however better to try, cos you do get marks for trying at least). I've found the boards to be equivalent in level, pretty much, with some pieces featuring at one grade for one, and at another for the other board, in both directions - what you will find is that it's actually more important to think about the level of playing demanded at each grade than how technically difficult or not the piece is. Trinity is thought in some quarters to favour the less technically nitpicking but more musically expressive one, AB the technical expertise over the musicality, but you'll find opinions in both directions on this one too. One word on Trinity exams - each mark does count for more, proportionately, and that can come as a bit of a shock - the exams are marked out of 100, not 150. Neither board is a walk in the park, and both are equally regarded - it is just that the AB is perhaps better known.
good luck in deciding, and then in whichever exam you take .

I've just decided to enter my first pupil for a Trinity-Guildhall exam..... It was the scales option that swung it for me . She has got really stresses about scales in AB exams and this girl has enough on her plate to deal with, without her music lessons adding stress. She plays beautifully and I think the board might suit her. When looking through the syllabus, some pieces look fairly straight forward for the grade- others look very hard for Grade- but that's the same with AB.
The aural tests are different in places and I've started this pupil on the earliest Grade's aural tests. You have to do cadences at Grade 4 with TG- whereas it's Grade 6 with AB!!!
I haven't entered this pupil yet- but I think I'm realising that the the different exam boards just suit different pupils.

You should do that then. You wouldn't want to feel you had a second rate certificate.

I prefer Trinity for flute and LCM for piano. But I'm probably a second rate teacher.

I personally find that my pupils have always done better in the old Guildhall and new Trinity-Guildhall exams, scoring mainly Merits and Distinctions (or the old Honours). Maybe this is because the exam plays more to their strengths or it is slightly easier to score higher?

that's a little harsh. i think the OP just wanted to clarify that despite the question (i.e. why does the Trinity Guildhall exam look easier), she wasn't just looking for an easier way to get the next grade, but would prefer to do a more challenging exam and feel like she had achieved something.

It did amuse me....

I don't have any experience with Trinity, and in fact my teacher told me that she puts all her students in for ABRSM exams, except for those who she doesn't think are quite good enough (she explained about students who really really wanted to do exams and their parents were very keen for them to do the next grade, even though they weren't quite there yet. Or, more often, for those student sshe feels are capable, but not very talented, but they are of 'the correct standard'). These kids she would sometimes put in for Trinity exams.

I personally thought this sounded a little odd, especially when it doesn't makes any sense for one prestigious board to be easier than another, as it would only make them less competitive and would erode their credibility.

Now that I teach my own students, I of course want to do the best by them.
I took on a student who was already on track to take the ABRSM prep test - so we carried along that route - and I entered another student for ABRSM grade 1, as it was quite soon after I started teaching him and I was sure I new the syllabus well.

However, I am now exploring all the options available, and I have just picked up the Trinity Initial exam book there is so much more choice, the pieces are more appealing, the supporting tests are more musical and the general layout and approach is clearer and, I believe, more beneficial to the level of the student.
I won't be touching the prep test from now on, as I really feel that the Initial is so much better.

I've had a quick look at the grade 8 syllabus, and that too does not seem any easier than the ABRSM (in fact, I believe a few of the pieces this year to be quite difficult). The only down side I would say is that there is not so much choice of pieces as with ABRSM. The supporting tests I think are ingenious - music examples of technical ability, which is how I teach my students - how many of us concentr4ate solely on scales and arpeggios to improve/measure our technique? (although I have noticed on the forums that there is a fan group for them, so maybe I am wrong! ) I know that I would encourage a Czerny/Berens/Burgmuller/Liszt/Chopin study any day!

In terms of the aural, I hate singing, but I am aware of its benefit to a person's musicianship as a whole. However, this is not the only way and personally I think it doesn't make that much of a difference to the exam.

Once I've done a bit more research and familiarised myself more with both LCM and Trinity, I really feel at the moment that I might lean away from ABRSM exams in the future.

Hi again,
Thanks for your replies. Like i say, i'm only a student and only been playing my violin for a year. Indeed, i have not looked at grade 8 etc, neither do i consider any one a second grade person let alone teacher! So, yes that was a bit harsh. I just simply find that the pieces at the lower levels and also the sight reading tests look easier. I can play (not perfecrt!) grade 4 at trinity guildhall, but certainly not be able to do this with the assciated board. Anyway, it still seems strange that some teachers get good/excellent results consistently with one board and not the other. Perhaps someone could do their exams from both boards!

I would just like to say my teacher is very good and enters all students for the asscisted board and i know from comments made that good candidates have scored poorly for their ability. Obviously it is a difficult subject!

Overall, i like the associated board, even if they are more difficult. I think it really makes you work harder to achieve good results. Thank you to the person who can read clearly and understand what i am trying to say. Perhaps there should only be one board? Are people taking singing exams made to play the violin, i think not!!

happy teaching!

It's not that AB are more difficult- just different. The reason why I am looking at them now is that TG offers flexibilty. You don't HAVE to memorise all those scales. I have a pupil who can play scales well with the music in front of her. She just can't memorise them all. Scales become a real major issue every exam and this pupil has a separate serious health issue that makes me think the level of stress trying to memorise scales gives her just isn't worth it. She gets merits with AB, but in her last 2 exams, her pieces have been described as 'nearly perfect' etc. She plays so beautifully. The AB doesn't allow her to play to her strengths with the supporting tests. She consistently gets higher marks in her pieces than most of my pupils with AB, but she doesn't get a distinction whereas several of the others do.
I believe that TG allows her the flexibility to achieve her potential. The AB at present doesn't as the scales experience makes the exam experience so negative. If changing exam boards can increase the quality of her life, that's a good thing. After her last AB exam, she was quite poorly. I'm sure the scales experience didn't help her health. She missed 1/2 a term's lessons (and school).
However, I don't want to use the possibility of the no scales option for students who are just too lazy to learn them!!!
As to the difficulty of the pieces- in Gr 4 clarinet (where I have studied the pieces) there are some very hard for grade pieces in both AB and TG. There are also some much easier ones (if you can play sonorously and with musicality) in both boards. In Gr 3 AB, I think there are some pieces that are fiendishly difficult for Grade and some (eg Spy who went out in the cold), which could be on the Gr 2 syllabus. But surely, a Grade 3 candidate would just be expected to play it better!!!????

I'm sorry Debra, but I really don't think that the AB is more difficult (or TG easier). They are different.

What you are saying is effectively equivalent to (for example) saying that Cambridge and Oxford should offer identical degrees. They don't, and each university has it's own strengths and weaknesses - and even for the same degree subject they offer different options. Some courses will suit some students better than others, just like with the different music exam boards.

Are you actually wanting to say that everyone who uses the TG syllabus (or any syllabus other than AB) is a second-rate player or teacher or that they have not done a 'proper' exam? This is how your posts are coming across (although I know you may not have intended this), and is why some people have taken offence.

The AB exams are a well worn path and that is all many of did when we were much younger. I enter pupils for both boards but find am finding that increasingly I am preparing students for Trinity for some or all of the following reasons:

Broader choice of pieces allowing for more flexibility in teaching around the grade and choosing repertoire to suit a pupil's learning objectives;

(still along the same line), More choice of pieces so pupils are more likely to be able to choose pieces that they are going to enjoy playing. I am a firm believer that music at all levels should be enjoyable and preparing for an exam should give pupils the chance to do that and not become just a chore;

Much more musical approach to scales. Yes, there aren't quite so many of them (I am a violinist and teacher) but the TG approach gives pupils the chance to do much more with the scales rather than just battering through reams and reams of notes;

Specialist examiners, so that my pupils generally get much more meaningful comments;

No requirement for Grade 5 theory. I still expect my pupils to do this at a convenient time and teach theory alongside pupils' pieces and technical exercises. However, especially when I have younger pupils who are forging ahead practically I do not expect them to have to wait to collect a theory certificate before achieving higher grades.


I should add that I only enter pupils for exams when I consider that they will benefit from the experience. Most beginners do either grade 1 and/or grade 2 (usually AB) but after that it becomes much more individual depending on each pupil's rate of progress and development. By the time pupils reach the highest grades we make the decision together based mainly on repertoire and the pieces the student really wants to learn.

I agree with Flossie above.

Whilst I don't think the OP is trying to say that that someone who takes a TG exam is a second rate player, I do think it is very wrong to take the view that ABRSM is more difficult - I don't think this is the case at all. They are simply different and ask for different skills to be demonstrated.

In fact, if you look as high up as the Diploma syllabuses - pieces that are on the DipABRSM list are on the TG LTCL list (the next level up) and I noticed that on the new lists, it occurs in the opposite way (pieces for TG ATCL are on the LRSM list) so I think that just goes to show that they are looking at different things.

Also, as I said before, it would not make any sense for one board to be easier than another, as it would only make them less competitive and would erode their credibility. No one would respect TG if it didn't demand a high standard and I know plenty of students at the top conservatoires in London who took TG exams before they entered.

You may personally find that you are more suited to the demands of ABRSM, but you may equally find that the demands of TG are exactly in line with your skills.

Don't make the mistake of thinking that by gaining an ABRSM award, your achievement is 'better' or 'harder earned' because it simply is not true.

With piano where the sight reading (and scales) have just undergone a review my piano teacher thinks that the reverse is now true.
Harder or easier? It depends on the person.

As far as the flute sight reading goes, I feel that TG has more of a steady increase in requirements as you move up the grades. With AB there is a very steep curve through 3, 4 and 5, and not a huge difference between 6, 7 and 8. By Grade 8 the two boards are very similar.

I find TG useful for more marginal candidates because they can concentrate on their strengths. Otherwise I had found broadly similar results between the two boards. I have one pupil who has done higher grade recorder exams with TG (6 and 7) and Grade 6 and 7 on flute with AB, and has come out with very similar results on both instruments. Others who have switched boards have stayed broadly consistent too.

I haven't previously used Trinity for higher grades (6/7/8) but am considering it for two pupils who play both violin and viola. I like the option to play two pieces on viola and one on violin (or vice versa) and think it will work well for these two girls. As far as the repertoire goes, there are plenty of violin and viola pieces that have appeared in both AB and Trinity lists for the same grade (albeit in different years) and some that have been set for different grades by the two boards. But as other posters have said, sometimes it's AB that puts the piece at a lower grade and sometimes it's Trinity!

I also like the way the scales are played in the exam for violin - major scale, arp and dom7th played together or both minors followed by the minor arp. Is it the same for other instruments?

I have used Trinity for lower grades for pupils where the flexibilty of the exam has allowed them to play to their best. E.g. a dyslexic candidate (memorising problems) who could choose to play the studies rather than the scales and a very nervous sightreader who chose to do musical knowledge instead. I certainly haven't seen them as an 'easy option' and found the results were more or less in line with what I would have hoped for if they had done AB grades. Just a less stressful experience all round because they had some choices about supporting tests.

Thanks! I knew there was another reason for TG - the violin/viola doubling option!

As a parent, I find it interesting that although most teachers say that the boards are equivalent, they seem to use Trinity Guildhall mostly in cases where they think the pupil might do better, showing that their favoured board is really AB.

It's similar to school exam boards, where most people feel OCR are more difficult for most subjects, but the state schools all use AQA and EdExcel in order that more pupils will pass - and then claim that of course all the boards are the same! Well, yes, they are according to the QCA; but any school pupil who's tried OCR will tell you that it's more difficult!

I think that for the actual playing the music boards probably are equivalent. The AB supporting tests seem to be more rigorous though, which may or may not be a good thing. My son was never good at aural, and his mark on that section meant he got a merit rather than a distinction several times. Fortunately, there's no aural in the DipABRSM, which meant he looked forward to the supporting tests for that rather than dreading them.

I do have another reason for primarily using AB, which is nothing to do with the standards but everything to do with administration. I have to emphasise that this is purely my own personal experience, but I have found that communications with AB are usually promptly acknowledged and dealt with, while communication with Trinity has at times been a nightmare. I don't mean communication with local reps, who have been uniformly helpful and accommodating, but trying to get problems dealt with by headquarters. I have one issue concerning the conduct of a pupil's Trinity exam still outstanding from last July - letters remain unanswered, phone calls never get past call waiting. Aaargh!

I think others may be in the same position as I am, which is being more accustomed to AB. I tend to use AB as default and make an active decision to use TG in some cases. The exceptions are where a pupil has already taken exams with TG. I have decided to use TG with several excellent pupils because they are more familiar with those exams.

I always used the old Guildhall because I was familiar with the centre and liked the pieces, so it was a natural progresion to move on to Trinity Guildhall. I also did Trinity Grade 8 myself, the reason being that I couldn't face all those scales with AB - not only because of the scales per se, but because I would have found it very nerve-wracking sitting there not knowing what was coming at me next. I'm a perfectionist and prefer to get from start to finish in a known quantity - i.e. the study. At the time I thought I was taking the easier option, but it was pointed out to me that not everybody would be able to play the Trinity Grade 8 study as well as I did - so the scales would have been the easier option for them. So it just depends on what people are more comfortable with!

My only experiences of AB have been with pupils who have come from other teachers and were used to AB, and I have found no difference; the pass/merit/distinction band was as I would have expected it to be in TG. I have, however, noticed that there seems to a limit to how low a sightreading mark will be with AB, whereas TG examiners seem to have no qualms about dishing out very low marks here where deserved! Better sightreaders have fared worse with TG. I realise that the same examiners can examine for all boards, and are not tied to one or the other, so it may be that they are under slightly different instructions with regard to marking sightreading in each of the boards.

Not so - my cello teacher, who is an AB examiner, has told me that if you work for one board you cannot work for another at the same time. I think if this were allowed it would be very confusing to try to administer the different requirements for the different boards.



In my admittedly limited experience I have found TG to be nowhere near as efficient and professional in their adminisration as AB. I onlly recently received a certificate for an exam taken in November - and the original result took several weeks as well.

I would agree with others that the admin side of things is something to take into account.
AB are generally more efficient at dealing with things though the TG local reps we have are excellent.
One thing which has influenced my decision to use TG for a student is knowing the date of the exam (and it's ALWAYS on a Saturday) already and having a very helpful rep who does his best to give you and exam time within an hour of what you request.
I think that this would be extremely difficult to to with AB merely because of numbers.

For me the big downside is the the time to get certificates out. The result is out very quickly (less than a week) but the certificate can take 3 months which is not really very good for a youngster who might want to take it into school. It's too far removed from the actual exam.

My daughter has done lots of AB exams up to Grade 5 (cello, singing, clarinet). She has always (except for Grade 2 singing!) got good, or even very good, marks. She has done a couple of TG recorder exams (Grade 4 and Grade 6). She did broadly similarly in these. The exams are certainly different, and even though she is a singer she appreciated the lack of singing back in the TG exams. She also liked doing a study instead of scales. However, there was no evidence that it was easier to get a very good mark and, as I have said elsewhere, I think it's actually bit more difficult to score very highly with TG.

I agree with those who say TG exams are different but not necessarily easier.

I came across an examiner not that long ago who had recently examined for both main boards - and one who had worked for both TG and LCM. Are they actually under contract, or are they simply on a list from which an examiner is chosen when required?

My son has taken grade 3 and grade 5 on the ABRSM syllabus, and grade 6 with TG (just a couple of weeks ago) on the clarinet since he took it up 2 1/2 years ago. We took TG this time round because at 9, he hasn't yet had the time to learn enough theory to take G5, but his practical skills are all there, and it didn't seem a good idea to wait for the theory to catch up! He will sit G4 for exam practice in the summer, and probably do G5 theory the following session. He has scored a merit in each of these exams, all at around the same level, just a few points below distinction. We were unaware of the reqirements for the aural tests this time round, though, and if he had had adequate warning, would have almost certainly been able to learn the cadences and modulations required at this level to obtain a distinction - he had perfected his pieces a lot better than on previous attempts, and this showed in the marks he received. I feel that they were examined at a very similar standard to the ABRSM grades, and that he has been fairly marked in all of the exams he has taken.

We found some of the pieces were easier, some harder, and many shared on the syllabus between the two boards at this level. The option of playing on Eb or bass clarinets gives the TG syllabus a much broader appeal, and the aural tests do seem a lot harder, to make up for the lack of a theory exam requirement. His teacher (a concert clarinettist) said that one of the Eb pieces was probably the hardest in the entire repertoire for Eb, and he has played it a few times and found it very difficult,. yet one of the grade 8 pieces for Eb he would have considered a lot easier...

He has started on G8 ABRSM work now, in anticipation of success in the theory exams over the next 8 months, though this time I should think it will take him at least a year / 18 months to get himself to the required standard!

Burl

I also use TG and have to agree it is great always knowing what day the exam will be.
My local rep is great and always rings that evening to let all us teachers know the result...the report arrives a few days later.
Our rep works very hard and is makes the whole experience very efficient.

I'm torn between the two boards and am swinging back to the AB at the moment. I like the new syllabus! The sight reading is very slightly more difficult with the AB, but it is very marginal since the new syllabus. Aural is definitely more difficult with the AB but Trinity mark quite harshly! Probably because it is easier so there is no room for mistakes!

I'm going off the TG 'technical exercises' section, and feel more comfortable with 'ploughing through' the AB scales instead. The scales can be used as good finger strengthening exercises and help to develop technique. Easier than doing extra 'technical exercise pieces'.

I'm still torn and confused though!