Sample abrsm question : "can you outline the structure of the sonata's first movement with reference to the score? How do you make this structure clear to the listener?"

I can map out sonata form, but are their specific ways you should perform each section to make it more obvious?!

You definitely wouldn't perform each section as if to say "this is the exposition, and now this is the development etc" because you don't want to fragment the music- yes it's sonata form but you want a continuous flow.

I think it's all about the subtleties and what you as a performer want to alert the listener to. Something as simple as making core motifs a little more incisive can make a big difference; a listener may not know all of the jargon, but they will know in the exposition that certain things keep coming back and that in the development they recognise bits but they have changed.

Depending on what sonata you are working on, sometimes there is space for a little breath between one or two sections which can flag up an end of one thing and a beginning of another.

I would avoid playing repeats the same; in any good sonata recording there are subtle changes of shading if something is repeated. I think this is relevant to the question because you're saying that your listener would be aware of repeated material so you are changing your interpretation to avoid boredom.

Listeners from your professionals to your tone deaf have an incredibly astute perception of rhythm. I would argue one of the most important things to be throwing melody and harmony out of the window for a couple of practise sessions and looking at the rhythmic structure of the piece- rhythm of melodic motifs, rhythm of melodic motifs in the accompaniment/other voice, does this change in the development? are there any rhythmic patterns that go right through the movement without changing (continuity is just as important as establishing structural difference).

Those are my thoughts- I don't know much about sonatas outside the theory of them to be honest. You're probably doing it all anyway but sometimes when it's thrown at us as an exam question, all knowledge of what we've been doing goes out of the window.

Thanks for your insight, I'm varying parts but not to the depth that you are suggesting. So I'm going to have a more in depth look at the sonta (mauro Guiliani sonata in C) I can't play it as fast as the proffesionals so I'm going to add more musicality. Plus I'm not a academic person so these questions feel abit alien.

It's not all about speed as long as the character isn't lost. What you can get from listening to recordings is an insight into how other people do things and decide what you like/dislike. A good way of practising is just sitting with the score to be honest- when professionals say they practise 8+ hours a day, probably only 5-6 hours of that is spent actually with/at their instrument (the good ones anyway, the ones that literally practise with their instrument 100% of the time are the bland thousand notes per second but no substance types). Example, I played piano for half an hour yesterday but spent 3 hours between singing the opening melody of one piece to decide on shape, and working out and tapping the (ridiculously difficult) rhythm of two pages of another piece. It all constitutes practise and what I did yesterday was more productive than sitting at the piano for 8 hours fumbling around.

What you have to remember about these questions is that they are not there to catch you out, but to find out about how you operate as a musician. Maybe think about the questions alone away from the music and jot down some things that come to mind (99% of the time it's just common sense/what you're already doing), then perhaps ask a more "academic" friend/people on here about how to word it in more examiner-appropriate terms?

I would take this as asking what you personally aim to do in your playing of whatever relevant movement is in your programme. Listening to other performances can help of course.

This is great advice.