Would anyone like to join me in a fun and challenging project? Namely, ranking David Nevue's sheet music (songs) by difficulty.

I recently did a lot of score-comparing before I chose my current DN piece to work on (While the Trees Sleep) and it occurred to me at the time that it would be really helpful if all of his sheet music was ranked according to difficulty.

I emailed a bit with David about this subject and he was intersted in the idea. So with David's permission, I'm starting this thread to ask people to join me in choosing difficulty rankings for David's scores. If he thinks our rankings are helpful or informative, perhaps he'll post a list on his web site.

First of all, I think it's important to make rankings only based on DN's music, not as compared to other composer's music. This will make the rankings more accurate IMO, and easier to decide.

The first thing that needs to be settled on is criteria. Perception of difficulty is fairly subjective, but there are some objective elements which could be used to keep the rankings relevant to most players.

I edited this paragraph:[/b] After hearing Kawaigirl and Monica's comments, I agree with using a difficulty ranking of 1 to 5, with level 1 being the easiest and 5 being the hardest.

Then of course, criteria need to be choosen. After that, people can start ranking the pieces they've played or are familiar with, and other people can comment on those rankings etc.

Here are some elements that could be used to determine difficulty:

1) Overall tempo.
2) Presence or absence of rubato
3) Intricacy of the RH part, melody only in RH or does the RH also have accompany voces?
4) Frequency of 16th notes in RH
5) Intricacy of LH part, accompany only or is there also melody in the LH?
6) Frequency of 16th notes in LH
7) Is the LH part easier when the RH part is more difficult, and the RH part easier when the LH gets more difficult? If yes, that would the piece a lower difficulty ranking
8) Are both hands doing difficult things together (i.e. syncopation or 16th notes in both, is there opposing movement between the hands etc) If yes, than the piece would get a higher ranking
9) Number of pages (length of piece) longer would equal higher ranking.
10) Key of the piece, number of flats or sharps (more equals harder.)

Some of these (esp the last two) might be debateable, but I tried to put together things that would be relevant for both beginning and more advanced players.

So to sum up:

* Difficult as compared to other Nevue pieces.
* Levels 1[/b] through 5[/b], where 1=easier and 5=more difficult
* Difficulty ranking based on the 10 criteria listed above.

So, what do all the DN fans think? Does anyone have any comments about my ranking criteria etc?

Using the above criteria, I would give the following rankings:

God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen- level 5
Dance of the Muse- level 5
While the Trees Sleep- level 4
Overcome- level 3
Joy- level 2
Solitude- level 1

BTW I don't want anyone to think this is a criticism of DN's music, whether or not a piece is difficult does not have anything to do with how much we like that particular piece. And I'm not really interested in a discussion of whether or not his music is difficult in general. That's why I want to keep the rankings based only on other DN pieces. I personally feel like a lot of his music sounds more difficult than it actually is to play, but there are a few pieces of which the opposite can be said (i.e. they are harder to play than you think by justing listening to them.) On the other hand, I think his music gets easier to play as you play more of his pieces and you get a feel for his style etc.

So would anyone like to help me in ranking his scores? If you've played some of his pieces, what ranking would you give them? What do you think of the rankings I've made above? Should I change anything in the criteria? Is a 1 through 5 ranking better? Have I asked enough questions yet?

What an interesting thread Shiro. I think the 1-5 ranking is better since a ranking of 3 = medium difficulty.

Wonderland = 1
Vigil = 3
Emerald Valley = 2
Home = 2
Deep Heaven = 2
Sweet Dream & Starlight = 3
Winterwalk = 3
Overcome = 3 (edited)

What does the ranking tell me at the end of the exercise?

I would say it would tell you which one to start on if you were a beginner. Sometimes it's hard to know how much effort a piece will require unless you've finished it.

I've not played any of his music, but I think it's very helpful to see this. I do have a question, though: What happens if you rank something 5 (or SK's 4) and then he writes something much, much more difficult? Just go with more levels? I guess that's a good reason to make a 1 the easiest and not the hardest!

Nancy

kawaigirl, your comment about having 3 being the midpoint if there's a 5-level ranking makes a lot of sense, I hadn't thought of that!

So for the rankings you made, did you base them on a 5-level or 4-level system? One of the reasons I ask is because if I used 5-levels, I would put Overcome at 3, but I was thinking that based on the pieces that I'd put at 2 or 1, but maybe that's not the way to think about it. Instead of thinking about what's easier, maybe I should think about what's harder... Hmmm

CozyWriter, I'm not sure I understand your question? I don't mean that weshould assign rankings as an exercise for ourselves, but rather that the rankings we come up with could be used by future pianists when trying to choose something to play.

For myself, there are so many DN pieces that I want to play, so when I choose a piece by him to work on, I choose it knowing that whatever I don't choose now, I'll probably choose later. So I want to make my choices based on the other music I'm playing. If I'm working on a few difficult pieces, I'll choose an easier DN piece. If my difficult pieces are all polished, or I don't currently have a difficult piece in progress, then I'll choose a more difficult DN piece. So I don't think it's only beginners who care about the difficulty of a piece. That's why I wanted the difficulty rankings, and I thought that if I would benefit from rankings, others might as well. Does that make sense, or am I really misunderstanding your question?

Nancy, you said

I think this has been true for me in the past, but I'm trying to change that. I want to be really aware of my own level, what pieces I can move through quickly versus what will take me a really long time. That's part of my interest in analyzing, because the information I get from analyzing helps me to not only understand that specific piece, but also to be able to recognize what things in other pieces will be easier or harder for me. I want there to be less guesswork involved. So if I pick up the score for one of DN's pieces for example, knowing what I know about my own playing, and looking back on my experiece with playing his other music, I can think "piece A will probably take longer than piece B" and I have a good chance of being right. If I get really good at this, a "deadline" piece will be no problem, because I'll know whether or not I can get a specific piece ready by a certain time. If that makes sense. Oops, I'm in danger of hijacking my own thread here! :p

Your point about having 1 be the easiest is really important! I hadn't thought of that. And it's not necessarily a given that 1 is the easiest, Japanese rankings always have 1 be the hardest, top level. But we won't be doing that, so yes if necessary in the future we could have a level 6 or 7 piece.

For psychometric reasons, a 5-point scale is better than a 4-point scale (allows more sensitivity and variability). Of course we probably won't be doing any statistics on these ratings, but as kawaigirl points out, a 5 point scale allows a rating of 3 as moderate. I'd suggest starting off with 5 points. It's always easier to combine categories later if we need to than expand from a smaller to a larger scale.

I think this is a fun idea, ShiroKuro, and also one that would benefit AB forum even if not David himself. We get many posts from people asking which Nevue piece they should tackle next.

I need to think about these more, but a few ratings off the bat would be:

Solitude -- 1
Wonderland -- 2
GRYMG -- 5
Watching the Clocks -- 5
Home -- 3
The Gift -- 2
The Emerald Valley -- 2
The Vigil -- 4

p.s. I'd put Overcome at 4 myself.

If I were really getting all statistically obsessive and purist about this, I would suggest that people make their ratings independently (= in private and blind to what everybody else is rating them). Then I'd calculate the reliability of the ratings and compute the mean difficulty level across raters, perhaps throwing out outlier ratings. But that wouldn't be as much fun as seeing what everybody else thinks and thrashing it out by consensus.

Ok, I'm sold! Let's use a 5-level scale!

Here are my rankings, re-assigned under the 5-level system:

God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen- level 5
Dance of the Muse- level 5
While the Trees Sleep- level 4
Overcome- level 3
Joy- level 2
Solitude- level 1

Monica, thanks for adding your rankings, I look forward to more.

Also, what do you think of giving Overcome a 3 ranking? I personally think it's a good midpoint for his music. For me, I found it easy to get up to speed and "play" but more difficult to play well, and it has some hidden difficulties. That's why I gave it a 3 (out of 5.) Comments?

Kawaigirl, would you mind re-doing your rankings in a 5-scale?

If it weren't for all those darned bass runs starting on E-flat that I keep missing, despite using the new and improved fingering you gave me, ShiroKuro, I'd agree with the "3" for Overcome. But I do think it's more difficult than Home, so if we go with 3 for Overcome, then Home would need to bump down to 2. I'd like to hear what others think about Overcome.

Monica, we're simul-posting!!!

Hmm, a 4 for Overcome. That's good to know, because it shows how subjective rankings are. But that's ok. I think it's all relative, and even with that inherent subjectivity, it will be useful.

Personally, I'm not interested in being a purist (that's probably because I'm not good at math!) but I see what you mean about being influenced by others. I think that's ok though, because maybe that will make the rankings more applicable.

Can we get all the people who've played Overcome to vote on its ranking? I suspect that Overcome is probably one of the most popular DN pieces. It certainly gets a great response whenever I play it for people. I can play 5 pieces in a row with Overcome in the middle, and people always ask about it or say "I really like that one!" So I think a ranking for that one will likely get referenced a lot.

On a scale of 1 to 5 (keeping in mind the criteria I posted above) what ranking would you give Overcome?

Ooops, I meant "3" for Overcome. I was thinking of shiro's 4 level scale and my 5 level scale at the same time when I was making the rankings.

Shiro, I was using the 5 level scale.

Overcome is at least a 4 in my book. Probably a 5.

I think a person's rating would also depend on how bad ...umm good someone already is at piano.

I'm not good...anything of David's is quite difficult for me. I have been able to play a couple of them, but none very well.

As for subjective, Monica rates Watching the Clocks a 5 and that was one of the easier ones for me to actually learn.

I'm no help, sorry, just rambling....

GREAT idea, Shiro!! I'm "in!"

Since "Overcome" has been used as an example already I would have ranked it a "2" when it came to just tinkering with it. However, to play it "smoothly" from beginning to end without skipping a beat I would rank it a 4!

I've personally found that most of his music initially appears easy to play but performing it "lightly" and in tempo requires much practice. Plus, there's this "groove" in so many of his pieces!

Since I am [still] "impaired" using my Zoom here's a lousy recording of a song that took me weeks to play from beginning to end without losing the tempo and without panicking with hopes that I can have it "ready" for the 2007 Dec recital:

Big Snow in Salzburg [/b]

Given my skill level and stiff arthritic fingers I would rank "Big Snow" a "4" while someone else might rank it a "3."

As for the list... give me some time on this one. I've been too sick to even play the last few days (don't tell "the dudes").

Daria

Rocky, how did you do the strike-through?! That's one of my favorite things (I use it a lot on another forum) but I didn't think it could be used here. Is it just brackets and "strike" and then "/strike?" Sorry for going OT!

You said:
This is why I want to only compare his pieces to the rest of his music, hopefully that should reduce some of the subjectivity, because the question is not "how hard is this music, how hard is this to play?" But instead the question is "how hard is this DN piece compared to that DN piece?"

Then the next step is to look at why one person thinks something is harder while another thinks it's easier, and try to come to a mid-point based on the criteria I listed above.

It's definitely not perfect! But hopefully we'll be able to come up with rankings that are relevant. So please continue adding your thoughts!

Daria, I can't listen right now, but I'm looking forward to your recording. And do share your own list- AFTER you feel better!

Thanks everyone.

I was just looking in a collection that has two pieces I am really in love with (not DN's music.) This collection ranks all its pieces either A, B or C (A is the easiest, C is the hardest.) I noticed that the piece which I figured would be easier for me is ranked C, and the piece that I thought would be harder for me is ranked as B. If this collection had a note explaining how the rankings were determined, or had a note for each piece saying why it got that ranking, that would really help.

I don't know if we'll be able to do this, but one possibility would be to have a note about why each piece has its ranking. For example, for Overcome we could say "this is a 4 because of the repeating Eb in LH" or conversely "in spite of the difficult Eb in the LH, the other elements of this piece earn it a 3."

Just thinking outloud here.

That's funny! I'll need to revisit it. I rated it a 5 because I love that piece and eagerly ordered the sheet music, but when I sat down and tried to play it I was completely intimidated by all those flats and the fast tricky rhythm. But maybe I gave up too quickly...

Hi Shiro! Here's my list. I've got more pieces that I haven't printed out yet + more I want to purchase! :p
Thanks for making yet another effort to keep us on the ball!

Monica, Man do I love to listen to Watching the Clock-- but it really is a "beast" to play correctly! I put it back under "the pile" for another day.
_______________________________________________________

David Nevue Scores Ranked in [my] Terms of Difficulty[/b]

• A Turn to Grace = 4 (5 sharps)
• Away in a Manger = 2
• Big Snow in Salzburg = 4
• Broken = 5
• Deep Heaven = 2
• God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen = 5
• Home = 2
• It is Well With My Soul = 3 (5 sharps)
• Light = 5
• No More Tears = 4 (5 sharps)
• Overcome = 4
• Psalm 77 = 2
• Sweet Dreams & Starlight= 5
• The Emerald Valley = 1
• The Gathering Fields = 3
• The Gift = 1
• The Kindness of Strangers = 3
• The Vigil = 4
• Variations = 4
• Watching the Clock = 5 (7 flats and quirky rhythm)
• We Three Kings = 5
• While the Trees Sleep = 5 (REALLY tricky measures - p.7)
• Winter Walk = 3
• Wonderland = 1

[/b]

1st edit 2-6-07
_____________________________________________________

Daria

Okay, Daria, you really DO win the #1 David Nevue fan prize!!

I'm curious as to why you rated Wonderland a 3? I thought it was much easier than The Gift or Emerald Valley, both of which have lots of dotted eighths stuff going on, whereas Wonderland is straight half notes and quarter notes.

Daria, thanks for posting your list!

It's really interesting to see everyone's rankings! Esp for the pieces I've played, but also for the pieces I have so far only listened to.

I'm playing While the Trees Sleep right now, and I gave it a 4, partly because the difficult section is relatively short, and partly because I felt that God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen is much harder, so I didn't want those two pieces to have the same ranking.

At some point we have to decide what to do about pieces that are given different rankings by different people, how to come to a reasonable consensus on that.

Maybe one thing to think about is who would the rankings be used by the most. I'm guessing that more advanced players would not feel the need to rely on difficulty rankings, but beginning and intermediate players would be more likely to use the rankings. Based on that, it might be a good idea to err on the side of a higher ranking. At the same time, I don't want the rankings to be inflated, and I still think that in the scheme of things, DN's music is not all that difficult overall. I think his music is very accessible, and I wouldn't want someone who hadn't played his music to see the rankings and think "oh, I can't play that, it's too hard!" when it really isn't.

I also want to make sure (as much as is possible) that two pieces which have significant differences in difficutly don't get the same ranking.

So one thing I'd like to ask everyone is to figure out what you think is the most difficult DN piece you've played so far, and then as you rank other pieces, decide whether or not they are really as difficult as that, or how much easier they are.

Is that the wrong way to approach it? To compare from the hardest down? Or would it be better to settle on which is the easiest, and work up from there?

One thing I'm trying to ask myself is why I ranked something easier than what other people ranked it. For example, Overcome, since so many people have played it, and everyone ranking it higher than I did. If I can figure out the answer to that question it will probably give me something to use to settle on one ranking for each piece.

Also, I want to come up with a short explanation (or disclaimer!) that explains the rankings, so that people who see them for the first time will know how the rankings were decided and by whom. For example, I think our rankings are probably close to irrelevant for someone who plays by ear. (For one thing, ear-players tend not to care about the presence or absence of black keys.)

So the list of rankings could be prefaced with something like:

"These rankings were assigned by beginning and intermediate players (not by David himself.) If you are an advanced player or if you play by ear, these rankings may not be relevant for you. Also, please keep in mind that these rankings are based only on David Nevue's music, they do not reflect how any piece compares to music by other pianists."

Hmm, that's maybe a little long. But here's what I want the disclaimer to say: who made the rankings, and that the rankings are as compared to other DN music.

Any comments? Suggestions?

Monica, Uh, me too. I'm digging it out tonight to figure out why I didn't originally play through it more than once. 'Could be that another piece just took hold of me and made itself my latest obsession! Good detective work!!

Shiro, If you can help me out with the rhythm for the LH on those difficult measures on P. 7 of "While the Trees Sleep" I'll knock it back to a 4!

Also, I didn’t know whether to give “Overcome” a 3 or a 4 ranking so I opted up! Hmmm... the notation LOOKS like a 4 but once it's played you realize that it's actually a 3. Does that make any sense?!? I’m revisiting THAT one tonight too!

I agree – in fact, it’s already happening!


Daria

Well, I never said I played it correctly! Just that the notes were not hard to learn, very repetitive. In fact, I acknowledged that I don't play anything very well.

I'm going to go away now, because at my level of playing I'm in no position to rate the difficulty of anything.

I am just going to rank the ones I have the sheet music for and that I have also played or attempted to play.

• The Gathering Fields 4

• The Emerald Valley 3

• Overcome 4

• Deep Heaven 2

• Home 2

• The Gift 1

• Ascending with Angels 5

• The Vigil 3

Ooooooops forgot

While the Trees Sleep.............4
Variations........................4

Rocky, Oh no you don't -- you're not getting outta THIS one!!

If you aren't intimidated with "Watching the Clock" then you just keep plugging away at it!!!

Also, please DO rank according to your ability -- this exactly what Shiro has in mind.

Daria

Daria,[/b] regarding the difficult passages of While the Trees Sleep, on the last page, how are you practicing them? If you want to try what I did, I'll try to explain it. First of all, you have to slow it way down. Forget how David plays it (for now) you have to feel it for yourself or it's not going to be possible.

Practice the RH HS and count as you play. 1 e and a 2 e and a etc. Notice where the change in pattern occurs (the change which didn't occur in the previous section at the bottom of page 6.) This is in the last half of the 3rd count. If you were counting, it's the "and a" part of "3 e and a." Feel that count, that's where the pattern deviates. Etch in your head that the pattern changes at that part of the measure.

Now play the the LH HS. Notice the tie. but count it. In the following, hyphened bold parts represent ties or non-16th notes, so here's the count: 1 e and a 2-e[/b] and a-3[/b] e-and[/b] a-4-e[/b] and-a[/b]. Feel the ties, feel the counts that aren't played individually. Play this HS.

Now notice that the pattern-change in the RH occurs on the "and" where the LH is in the middle of an 8th note (e-and). Feel that.

Now play HT very[/b] slowly. Just focus on that section. Play it 7 times, slow! Give yourself 3 days, and it'll be yours. But, you have to keep playing this section on its own for a long time, because it'll fall out of your fingers faster than anything.

I am starting to think that this is not the hardest section of this piece, because I can now play this section at whatever tempo I want. It's the rest of the piece that I can't get to a tempo I like and that I can't create and maintain the right momentum.

Daria, this is so funny! I think Overcome looks like a 2 or a 3 but when you play it you realize how tricky that Eb is. We must be coming from opposite directions!

Rocky, please continue sharing your thoughts/rankings, as long as you want to of course! Anyone who has a score is welcomed and encouraged to share their ideas about a ranking.

Babs, thanks for sharing your rankings! Eventually, I'm going to put all the pieces together and include each person's rankings and start "choosing" some definitive rankings.

Daria said:
Actually, this isn't exactly what I had in mind... I want the rankings to be an accurate reflection of how one DN piece compares to another in terms of difficulty (as much as accuracy is possible.) I don't want the rankings to be something like "this is a 5 if you're a beginner but a 2 if you're an intermediate player." If we did it that way the rankings would always change with the player.

Instead, I want the rankings to be based on the score, and on the criteria I listed above. But I want to keep a middle ground, so that the rankings can be useful to players of a variety of levels.

So for example, although I am no longer bothered by a score that has a lot of flats or sharps, I remember I really used to be. Because of that, I'm ignoring my own current ability (not that it's all that great) in including that as a criteria.

So I want people to rank according to those criteria as much as they possibly can. If someone has suggestions for the criteria, then of course please share them here.

I hope this makes sense.

What do you think?

Monica, 'Thanks for pointing out my "oops" because I had confused Wonderland with The Kindness of Strangers (they're both from the same album, Postcards from Germany[/b] ). I'll probably be making more amendments. :rolleyes:

Daria

Oh my goodness, :3hearts:

Daria

I think we have ourselves a committee!!

Daria