In a conversation the other day, a friend of mine mentioned "intermediate students." I realized that, when it came right down to it, I did not know what this meant. I looked around here at PW, and while the terms "intermediate," "advanced," and "levels 1-?" were bandied about, there was really nothing that I could say really told me what these, for want of a better term, grading systems meant.

What are Levels 1-x? Is there some standard that defines these or are they accepted industry standards after some specific accomplishment? What is that accomplishment?

When does a "beginner" become an "intermediate" and an "intermediate" an "advanced?" What kind of music do those who achieve these various ranks play?

Thank you in advance for any info.

Most numbered grading systems are based on the ABRSM (Associated Board of the Royal Schools of Music) syllabus. That system is used in the UK and many of its former colonies.

The ABRSM also inspired the Canadian syllabus, called Royal Conservatory of Music (RCM).

The RCM also served as the basis for the Certificate of Merit given by the Music Teachers Association of California.

Also similar is the Student Achievement Testing Day (SATD) given by the Michigan Music Teachers Association.

There is also a national program, the National Music Certificate, which is quite similar.

Then there's the American College of Musicians Guild Syllabus. I don't know much about it, but John v.d. Brook is the resident Guild Guru and can fill you in.

I'm also woefully ignorant regarding Australia, but I think they also have something similar.

Aside from the syllabus systems, the words Elementary, Intermediate, and Advanced tend to get thrown around a lot here in the US. Basically, they mean the following:

Elementary - this is all the basics, traditionally covered in the first three levels of a method series between ages 7-10, where students learn the pitches on the grand staff, basic rhythmic notation, and expression markings (dynamics, articulation, phrasing, etc...)

Intermediate - this is where students transition from "didactic literature" meant to teach reading and technical fundamentals into standard classical repertoire (or jazz or pop or whatever.) This is the world of composers we've all heard of - Clementi, Burgmuller, Kuhlau, Kabalevsky, and the greats like Haydn, Mozart, Bach, Beethoven, Grieg, etc...

Advanced - this is where you've arrived at a place where the goal of study is expression and interpretation. The literature is more difficult and requires a well trained mind and physical technique.

In RCM terms, Elementary is around Levels 1-2, Intermediate from 3-6, and Advanced from 6-10.

For most US methods, Elementary is from Primer to about Level 3, and the rest is Intermediate.

Also note that different repertoire anthologies (Snell, Bastien, or Helen Marlais for example), are fairly arbitrary and may or may not line up with RCM or any given method.

Kreisler, thank you so much for this information. I have not yet taken the opportunity to research the links to answer my question, but rest assured I will. Thanks again.

You said something in your discussion of the advanced level that intrigues me. Since it would make this thread take a wild turn, I will start another one.

Farmer Dan,

Kreisler's summary is spot on. The Piano Guild doesn't deviate from this standard, either, and divides Elementary and Intermediate into six levels each, their Preparatory is actually an amalgam of late intermediate and early advanced literature, which is divided into 4 levels. Altogether, students have 16 levels to progress through; when they are on fire, they will complete several levels in a year, and in other years, when they're on a plateau, they might not even advance one level.

Most of us would probably classify the Bach Inventions, the Op 49 Sonatas of Beethoven, the easier works of Chopin, as late Intermediate. The Guild puts these into the first two years of it's Preparatory phase.

Works of increasing difficulty, such as the most difficult dances from Bach's French Suites, the 1st movement of his Italian Concerto, Brahmas Op 79 Rhapsody, Beethoven Sonatina Op 79, etc., would be level 3 or 4 of Preparatory.

If it would help, I would be happy to break repertory requirements down even further for you.

John

John, I certainly would like to know. From 1 thru 16 would be awesome but whatever you can shed light would be great. Thanks.
Nguyen

P.S. Dan, my apologies stealing your OP for a moment here. I’m sure you like to know as well.

I should note that Guild requires student to be competent in several technical phases as well as repertoire. Students must be able to play scales in the key of each piece performed at audition, and the primary chord sequence, HT, including inversions for higher levels.

Elementary level begins from EA, absolute beginner, through EF, which is the easiest of the Bach Anna Magdlena Bach Notebook dances, such as Minuet in G, BWV Anh 114, Clementi Op 36, #1 Sonatina in C, Robert Schumann Soldier's March, Shostakovich March, Op 69, #1.

Intermediate level begins where Elementary leaves off (obviously) with Bach Minuet in G, BWV Anh 116, for example, more Sonatinas through the most difficult of the Kuhlau; the Beethoven Sonatinas, not including Op 49; Mozart K535 would be classed as Level IF or PA (Preperatory level A). Tchaikowsky's Album for the Young would fall into the intermediate classification, much of the more challenging Kabalevsky student pieces, including his a minor sonatina.

At the upper end of Intermediate, it gets a big diffuse; Guild classifies Schumann's Scenes of Childhood as IE and IF, but I personally feel that to play them well as written, it falls into the PA to PC category. This is always a problem. Students can often play the notes, not quite a tempo, but the performances are not musical, and that's because subtle difficulties which students need to master are elusive. I digress. Also in the upper intermediate are the easiest works of Chopin, such as a couple of the Preludes, Waltzes and Mazurkas.

The Preparatory level is broken into four levels, and in my opinion, really spans the true upper Intermedate and lower Advanced.

In the 19th Century (even in the 20th), composers wrote salon music for people to play at home. It couldn't be too technically demanding, or people wouldn't buy it. Much of this music falls into the Guild classifications of IE, IF, PA, and PB. True art music, which which demands real competence on the instrument, begins at level PC.

The Guild publishes a lengthy syllabus which is, as you might surmise, the real difinitive guide. I've tried to summarize a dozen pages into less than one, so please don't expect 100% agreement of what I've stated.

Thanks John & Kreisler. If you don't mind, I will copy and save your above posts into my Piano Collection spreadsheet. *thumb up* (I want to do the emote, but don't know how yet)
Nguyen

I don't mind.

One of the biggest problems teachers face is a lack of student and parental understanding of what constitutes "good" piano playing. Many students believe that because they can whip out the notes of the Brahms Ballade, for example, that they are playing advanced literature. Well, note-wise,they generally are, but very poorly. I'd much rather have a student who reaches the upper intermediate level, playing beautifully, than a student who massacres advanced literature and believes that they are somehow a good musician. Does that make sense?

Absolutely! I'm just in this for knowledge at the moment. It’ll take me forever, if I stick with it and succeed, to even start scratching the surface of what mentioned. I’m an elementary/beginner pianist, but a student at heart, so I love everything we exchange here. Talked with wife the other about Piano Teacher, she doesn’t seem too thrilled but understanding. It’s been on my mind the last few weeks figuring out where I can fit the lessons in. There isn’t much hope… *sigh*… but there’s hope. Are we drifting too far from the OP? Finding & actually having a Tacher Teacher is something always on my heavy mind. I just need to get it off my chest sometime. Thanks for the chance, Dan & John.