I have a number of very talented piano pupils at the moment who unfortunatly cannot sing in tune. I don't think it's fair that they're going to lose marks in the aural tests because of this. It could mean they miss out on the extra few marks needed to push them to distinction.

Does anyone else agree with this or know of a way around the singing? I thought I might try to see how they would get on with playing the tests back but I don't really know how it would work in the exam. It also doesn't really help with the sight singing.

The only real way around it is to use TG...

This argument has been raging on for quite some time so I'll get the popcorn and watch the fireworks - see the poll thread in General Music for some people's opinions...

http://www.abrsm.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=38652

Very few people can't manage to pitch a note with a bit of training and persistence. Good tips that I have picked up on the forum include getting them to put their finger in one ear - helps them to hear their own voice better. Ask them to make silly noises like sirens and growling etc to get them used to making high and low sounds with their voices. Sing with them - it is easier to match another voice than an instrument. Get them to sing a steady pitch, then try to match it on the piano (rather than the opposite way round, getting them to match a pitch you play) then alternate them singing and you playing. A few sessions of these sorts of activity you can usually get most people to at least approximately match a pitch and sing a few notes. Persistence and confidence that they will get there is the key.

The 'not fair' argument can so easily be used the other way round - is it fair for candidates who can't manage the tests to get a distinction?

You could also let them try the improvisation option in the TG exams, which in itself helps with aural awareness, with regard to intervals, phrasing, rhythm, etc.

I'm refraining from agreeing or otherwise with the opening question...I think I've said enough o that point in the other thread!

What's the experience of male teachers teaching girls or unbroken voices ? I can't sing falsetto. How do you other blokes approach this ?

Which is preferable - I can't play well but my marks show that I can sing.
Or - I can't sing well but my marks show that I can play.

The aural is a small part of the exam and the singing only a part of the aural tests. In theory I am not very much in support of the singing tests, though I have learnt a lot from teachers who have posted on the forums in favour of it.

In the end I don't think it matters all that much. Whatever exam you take, in whatever subject, you will have a weak spot somewhere. In music exams you might be brilliant at your pieces, play one of them not too well on the day - but come across an examiner who happens to give you something you find easy to sing. There is always an element of luck.

I'm inclined to agree with SueHM. I have rarely entered a pupils whom I felt would get Distinction level marks in all areas but I have had some Distinctions despite a weaker mark in one section. But if one section were so weak that it pulled the mark down below a distinction level I don't think I could complain that it was unfair. It might encourage the pupil to work harder at their particular weaknesses.

At a lower level I had a pupil fail this year because he made a terrible mess of his scales on the day. He knew them and could play them but on the day it didn't happen.However I don't think I could complain that he should have passed because all the other parts of the exam were OK.

My 12 year old daughter is taught by a male with quite a deep voice.
He has done an amazing job and taught her to sing in tune and has built her confidence. I do think it would be easier if she were taught by someone who had a voice she could sing with but it doesn't seem to have made a big difference in the end. He does sing quite a lot for her as well as playing the piano and he is able to get his point across. He never sings with her and I guess it couldn't be done.
She is going to take her Grade 2 exam in December. I am blown away that he has got her to this point.
He is very much in demand as a singing teacher with my daughter's contempories all of whom seem to work well with him.
Dora

Choir masters train trebles and in some cathedral and churc choirs get amazing results. I have a ghastly and unreliable voice and often in class music lessons sing an octave down, particularly when affected by chalk dust. (Yes, we sitll have chalk boards). But the children automatically sing at their own pitch. I don't think it's a very big problem.

In the aural tests my teenage boys often choose to whistle and some of them pitch surprisingly well.

I only have relative pitch and have to work hard at aural skills all the time to keep them finely tuned! In reality I don't find them easy. All you can do is keep practising them, not just at exam time, encourgae them not to worry about losing a few marks in the aural bit, after all, 150 marks is a goal not compulsory! 100 will do very nicely on a bad day and 101 is pretty OK too. Start getting to 111 to120 say yippee, and anything above that and you should be laughing. If it is not good enough, then remember the pupil has not failed and might need reminding of that too!

But seriously, good luck to all those facing aural tests if they have a bit of a blind (deaf?) spot. Would snoring in tune count do you think?

I agree, there are few people who really can't sing enough in tune for exam aural, especially if it is part of an on-going musical training rather than a quick few weeks before the exam for exam purposes only, and nothing inbetween.
I'm pretty sure for some of the singing tests it says 'to sing or play'?

Re: breaking voices on boys, I went to a talk by an AB examiner and he said to whistle instead is fine but won't neccessarily get full marks, but obviously would be better if the boy can only sing one or two random notes that day!