I would like other people's views on Rule 19e from the Practical exam regulations and its interpretation. I'm starting two separate threads, this one about examiners stopping candidates during their pieces and the other about deciding whether or not to play repeats. The whole rule says:

QUOTE

The examiner may, at his/her discretion, stop the performance of any piece when he/she has heard enough to form a judgement. Candidates should observe da capo and dal segno indications, but other repeats of more than a few bars should not be played in the examination unless the examiner asks for them.

I've started a separate thread about the second half of the regulation, referring to other repeats.

Twice in recent years I've accompanied candidates who have been specifically told, before they started to play a piece with a da capo or dal segno indication, that they were to stop without even doing the join back. After the first time it happened I complained to the Board. It has happened again more recently, this time with a Grade 5 flute candidate playing Gluck's Dance of the Blessed Spirits where the examiner specifically told her to stop at the end of the slow section. On that occasion I was sufficiently startled to ask the examiner "Don't you even want to hear the join back?" (which involves a little bit of music not heard elsewhere) and he was emphatic that she should stop before it. I intended to complain about that one too but never managed to find the time. I really hate it when examiners do that, because I've heard so many candidates, especially on their first piece, play that section much better the second time than the first. As the syllabus says they should play it, I feel that the very least the examiner should do is listen to the join back to see if they do it properly. I realise that the examiner may need to stop the candidate before the end of the piece, perhaps mainly for time reasons, though I always hope it won't be necessary. Examiners warn candidates if that may happen.

As a teacher I have always aimed to avoid choosing pieces which were obviously so long that a candidate would almost inevitably be stopped. At the higher grades I've avoided concerto movements because I disapprove so strongly of cutting the orchestral tuttis and having people perform bleeding chunks of music. Last term I took over at the last minute the accompaniment for a Weber clarinet concerto movement which had had all the tuttis cut out almost totally, I think mainly so that the candidate wouldn't have any time to stop and get yet more nervous! As an accompanist I try hard to make cuts that sound seamless, but any cuts do violence to the musical structure and most candidates will never have the chance to play their concerto movements complete in the right context. I prefer to teach repertoire at all levels that people could perform to an audience.

Am I the only one who gets steamed up about these issues?

The first harp exam I took was grade three and one of the pieces I was playing was a theme and variations- omitting variations 4, 5 and 6 (I think it was). Not only did the examiner ask me to leave out the theme so I felt I was starting in the middle of the piece, he then stopped me in the middle when I came to the variations the syllabus said to leave out and asked why I had turned the page so soon before letting me resume playing. He then had the gall to note on the mark sheet that variation 7 (which I found the hardest one) was somewhat uneven, having spectatularly sabotaged the piece. He stopped my other piece as soon as the A section resumed too, but at least that was just a stop and without warning!

Stopping a piece may well be justifiable. Messing the poor candidate up by making him or her think about approaching stops or making cuts/restarts should not be.

QUOTE (erard @ Feb 9 2005, 02:07 PM)

The first harp exam I took was grade three and one of the pieces I was playing was a theme and variations- omitting variations 4, 5 and 6 (I think it was).  Not only did the examiner ask me to leave out the theme so I felt I was starting in the middle of the piece, he then stopped me in the middle when I came to the variations the syllabus said to leave out and asked why I had turned the page so soon before letting me resume playing.  He then had the gall to note on the mark sheet that variation 7 (which I found the hardest one) was somewhat uneven, having spectatularly sabotaged the piece. He stopped my other piece as soon as the A section resumed too, but at least that was just a stop and without warning!

I hope that wasn't recent. I don't think I've ever had anything quite that awful. It's probably the best part of 10 years since I complained because a high grade candidate I was accompanying had had a piece stopped only a few bars from the end, which definitely felt like sabotage. I can't now remember whether the examiner had mentioned the possibility of stopping early, but in the event so little time was saved (if any by the time we had recovered from the disruption) that I thought it completely inexcusable.

Goodness, it all sounds quite terrible! I must have been really lucky, as in over 20 years of putting candidates in for exams (including a fair few higher-grade exams with some longish pieces) none of them have ever been stopped, with or without warning.

Well, in my Grade 6 exam (Guildhall), I got stopped in my study and in the 2nd movement of the Mozart in D (another of my pieces)!

I rather wish my examiner had stopped me druing that blinking great Handle Sonata I played for my grade 8. He must surely have realised it would have beed a kindness as I was so nervous there was no way I was going to recover from the disaster I made of it, and it just got increasing bad...

At the same time, I think as a candidate I might quiery or ignore any instruction to stop, and I certianly would stop at a suitable cadence (or improvise one). Otherwise it just sounds completely wrong, and certianly doesn't reflect a performance in any way!

if i ever got stopped in an exam i think it would completely throw me as i would think i had doen something wrong, and it was terrible etc!

I have to admit that I can't remember the last time I accompanied someone who was stopped, it must have been a long time ago. I thought it was something they'd stopped doing unless it was really essential (perhaps running late). Last year I had a Grade 8 flute student playing Schubert's Arpeggione Sonata and I was very suprised she wasn't stopped as it went on for 7 or 8 minutes, but the examiner heard the whole thing. I had warned her first that she could be stopped, and she decided on balance that it would be good if she played the whole piece because it would leave less time for scales!

I do remember playing the first movement of Milhaud's flute sonata for a Grade 8 student a long time ago. About 3 lines from the end the music builds up to a massive climax, flute has a loud descending scale flutter-tongued followed by a bar of total silence, then the piano enters with a very soft atmospheric phrase leading into the final bars. Well, guess what happened, we did the climax bit, and in the bar silence the examiner said "Thank you!". I just ignored him and carried on, I assumed he didn't know the piece because I suppose it could have sounded like an ending, but I couldn't imagine he actually wanted us to stop there.

Stopping any performance must, I imagine, be something examiners don't actually like doing (unless it's all so bad that they think they'll put everyone out of their misery!) but I guess there are time schedules to be met and some pieces on the syllabus are very long. (Maybe the syllabus people need to look harder at this aspect when the choose the music?) I've accompanied several Grade 5 Flute exams where, if you combine certain pieces, not least "The Blessed Spirits" and the Faure in List B, you get a huge programme of music time-wise at Grade 5 level, with the supporting tests still to come in the exam. One examiner did warn a candidate I accompanied that he might stop the pieces (and he did) but he had the grace to wait until the da capo was underway before doing so.

As to stopping candidates in silly places: I suppose examiners simply cannot know every single piece on every single syllabus and, unless the candidate provides copies, they don't have music for all the wind/brass exams or most of the string stuff, organ etc to follow. It must be a nightmare to know when to say "enough, thank you" for fear of doing just what's been mentioned here already, ie stopping a few bars short of the end or in a really unmusical place.

I had a Grade 3 pianist stopped once by an examiner in a single-page piece, which really unsettled her. I did write to the Board suggesting I thought it had been unnecessary as she was, generally, a fluent player. However, I do always warn my Grade 5 candidates upwards that it may happen and sometimes we practise this in a lesson so they know what it feels like and how to move on from an incomplete piece.

Some clarification on the regulations for this and the use of repeats is perhaps needed but I always go on the side of caution and try to prepare for every scenario if I can with my students.

I actually think that I would be rather upset (to put it mildly...) if I was stopped in the middle of a piece. To have been working for a very long time to prepare a performance of the pieces and to feel that the person to whom the final performance is being made doesn't even want to hear it would be awful. I think something like the guarantee given in the diplomas is needed you will be allowed to play for 35 minutes (+/- 10%) and will only be stopped if you go over this time, that's fair. I don't think that the syllabus creation people would be able to do much about it (without loosing a lot of potential material) because it's possible for a candidate to select one long piece and two shorter pieces and still have sufficient time; there will always be some that, for whatever reason, will chose the three longest pieces: a warning that candidates will be allowed to play for X minutes guaranteed at grade Y (no matter what has happened in the rest of the day) would be fair and that candidates suspecting that they would fail to fit their repertoire within this time should notify the examiner so that they may be stopped (otherwise the examiner could stop them without warning). I think that amending the regulations to give this guarantee would be fairer to all candidates and give clearer guidance about what is to be expected. People would also know that if they wanted to play the three longest pieces on the syllabus they would be likely to be stopped and could either choose to change or be prepared for that; it wouldn't be a lottery depending on whether or not the examiner was in a good mood or the person before didn't mess around, arrive late or play really slowly.

It would be awful to think that someone's performance may be cut short because another person had overrun or turned up late or whatever; it's just not a fair way of doing things. I'd much rather pay more to have more slack built into the exam system so that everyone gets a fair deal or have to wait because the exams are running late (yes, it's nervewracking but at least when the time comes things are fair), obviously the former would be preferable to the latter (and the regulation change would be the best of all).

Incidentally when I did grade 3 piano someone turned up just after I'd gone in for their grade 4 clarinet exam, only to find out that the exam was in fact on the previous day. Anyway as my exam was finished quite quickly (first one of the day, I was early and played at a reasonable tempo without long gaps) there was time for the clarinettist to be squeezed in between me and the next person (there was probably a slight delay to subsequent people but not significant). I know sometimes things are running late but if they can fit a whole grade 4 exam in ocassionally (this was probably helped by the fact that the accompanist for the exam was friends with the examiner at music college!) then surely the remainder of a grade 8 piece can't be too big. I always think that everyone should have the right to the entire of the exam time (they have paid for it) no matter what has happened before or after (obviously so long as they turn up on time); but if someone's programme is over time (a time which needs to be specified in the regulations for each grade) then they can be stopped.

QUOTE (dacapo @ Feb 9 2005, 12:09 PM)

Am I the only one who gets steamed up about these issues?

I would be delighted it if the examiner said 'play only the first four bars please' or if he thought I did well on those, 'no need to play pieces 2 & 3 thanks.'

it's not a nice rule nor polite but they boss, you underling.
V

I know someone who was stopped just before an awkward turnover in a grade 8 piano exam... she was not unhappy about that

I would not find it so bad if I knew it was a possibilty.. after all there are times in lessons when you get stopped to go over something.

A pupil I was accompanying for an exam was making an excellent job of her first piece when suddenly the examiner asked her to stop! There has been no warining that this might happen and we were both very startled and shocked. It really did shake my pupil up and to be honest rattled me somewhat!

My pupil went on to a very shaky performance of her second piece as the demand to stop playing had really made her jump.

I do feel that we should have some warning if this is likely to happen.

I have been teaching for 20 years and this was definitely a new experience.

Quaver