Do any of you piano teachers have experience of entering people for Grade 8, to play Mozart, when all the notes and rhythms are in place, but when the clarity just isn't? I'm sort of at my wits' end trying to get this pupil to put it in place, and have tried everything I know. It's just too legato, and too many notes overlap in runny passages. If anyone has any suggestions that I might not have thought of, that would be great, but my question, really, is how tough is an examiner likely to be when notes and timing are all correct, without a falter, but when that Mozart clarity of articulation just isn't there? We don't need a distinction, but nor do we want a fail! If it was me, I'd be tough, because that's what I feel Mozart depends on - but am I being too fussy? Am I expecting too much at Grade 8? I know it's a 'how long is a piece of string' question, because you don't really know from what I'm saying how far short of 'good' this is, but that's the only way I can describe it - correct in notes and timing, but very lacking indeed in Mozart 'style'.

I think the question is 'is the pupil's playing musical?' Is it expressive? I think that's what Mozart depends on most. I don't have experience of the specific situation you describe but I think that examiners wouldn't mind a different interpretation than the one they're used to as long as the pupil makes it work and plays it as though their interpretation is THE way to play it.

Has he listened to much Mozart - often you can tell them and show them until you're blue in the face, but until they discover it for themselves it can amount to nothing. Hearing/seeing someone else play it can make a huge difference.

But this is hardly surprising. Very few pianists at any level can play Mozart well.

Was it Rubinstein or Brendel or someone else that said "Young players play Mozart because of the small quantity of the notes, experienced pianists avoid Mozart because of the great quality of the notes" (or something along those lines).

Heck, there are some famous pianists (you will have to guess who I have in mind) whose general standard is light years beyond FRSM and whose reputations were established by playing Mozart, and even they play some of it horribly, so what chance does a Grade 8 candidate have of getting the beautiful clarity that, in an ideal world, it would always have.

Comment from pupil's Grade 5 exam sheet last year:

"The pulse was steadily maintained and there was good accuracy to the notes. Now aim for an even more elegant level of phrasing and touch to fully capture the Mozartian style".

And that was Grade 5 . . .

Not that I disagreed.

However, I love the word 'Mozartian' - assume this should be pronounced as Mozart-i-an' ??? Otherwsie to rhyme with 'martian' is pretty funny.

Yes that a good comment - it's really all down to phrasing, and use of staccato and semi staccato (given that the notes and tempo are correct)

This is close to my own thoughts on the subject. I do agree with Digby that listening and then hearing the sound you want to produce helps enormously; often that aural element simply translates to the fingers and it just happens - but in this case it isn't happening! I've never let an exam candidate play Mozart for an exam beyond Grade 6 before, because I've never felt anyone could really do his music justice, and we always decided to go for something that would get a better mark. But I'm wondering would it, necessarily? Am I just asking too much at this level when, as MT says, very few at any level can play Mozart well?

dolce@piano, I'd be interested to know what mark was given for this piece - did the comment mean that the piece wasn't actually played to the right standard for G5 and therefore got a low mark; or did it mean that the piece was well played for G5 and was intended to inspire the student towards the next level? The next grade I do (on clarinet) would be G5, and although I'm not planning it any time soon, it would be useful to know what the examiner's expectations are (particularly as I got it badly wrong for G4 )

The mark was 24

This in fact, though, was as examiner where several other teachers wrote and officially complained because his marks were very low. Actually, I didn't find them low as such (I think 24 was about right) but just 'all the same' (I think this pupil got 24 for all his pieces - which wasn't right - and another weak candidate got 21 for everything even though one piece was a definite fail in my opinion and one was a 23 or 24). His remarks though I found very apt - it was as though he really thought about the comments and then just stuck down a rough mark and thought that'll do for all.

You could sometimes think they work backwards from the total they want to arrive at! (Cynical? ME? )

Thank you