Yesterday I asked my teacher to play my piece, and she played it quite slowly and the dynamics were wrong. It was this piece - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tsuEpcn1Sw

Since it's only a grade 6 piece, I assumed she'd be able to play it at 75% speed or something despite not having played it before, but am I unreasonable to think that?

A fast etude like this? I think so.

Why the dynamics were wrong, though, I don't know.

No way I'd be able to sight read that at 75% speed. I've got the music and nope and just gave it a go - and I wasn't close to 75% speed.

Grade 6 pieces aren't easy. They obviously aren't as hard as you get - but these aren't 'pick up and play' pieces. Most people would need a play through or more to get them going - even teachers!

If she were sight reading it, I wouldn't fault her for that one bit. If she went home and practiced it for a week or two and that's what she came back with, then I might question it.

Personally, I would not have sight read it if I couldn't play it close to the way I would want my students to play it (and i don't think I would want to sight read anything at grade 6 as a demonstration!).

Grade 6? In what system?

Grade 6 in the AMEB system (Australian Music Education Board)

How does that compare with Grade 6 ABRSM ?

Why did you want your teacher to play the whole piece through?

I went to the AMEB web site, and it really is sketchy when it comes to information on levels. As best I can figure, there are 8 levels, but what difficulty level 8 is remains a mystery. It could be the Chopin Etudes or it could be easier or more difficult. So whether this etude is a level 6 or not is in question.

The youtube example is being performed at a very high level of artistry, which I certainly wouldn't expect teachers or performers to play at sight. Very good teachers and performers probably could play an acceptable version of it, perhaps at 3/4 tempo, but I certainly wouldn't hold it against any teacher who demonstrates some caution by playing it a bit slower.

I think AMEB grade 6 is equivalent to ABRSM grade 7. I could be wrong, my last teacher said something like that though


Not the whole piece, just the first page or so, so I could hear the parts she'd been instructing me on. Or maybe she offered to play, I can't remember.


I should clarify, the actual tempo I'll have to play is slightly slower than the recording. But basically I was just expecting a semi-decent rendition at a slower speed with correct dynamics/few mistakes. That's what my last teacher did (but then again, the pieces were easier, and with fast pieces she'd only play a couple of bars at a time).

Anyways, I guess I should have a less idealised view of what teachers are capable of... thanks all

The AMEB grading is not very standardised - this would be one of the harder Grade 6 pieces by far - and the Series 16 gradings are all over the place - in Preliminary there are Grade 2 pieces, and so on. I would be astonished if there were very many performances in the AMEB exams that reached more than about quaver=120, as compared to the dotted crotchet=66 indicated in the (AMEB publication) score.

Further, it is absolutely unreasonable to expect a piano teacher to sight read a piece like this perfectly! There are all kinds of reasons why this is a ridiculous expectation, but I'm interested in why you have any interest in hearing your piano teacher sight read?!

Okay okay! haha. I think we posted at the same time, but I'll just add that I (mistakenly) thought because she was such a good pianist a slower rendition would've been easy for her. I wasn't expecting perfection. but yes, I was wrong.

debussyfan - I realised we posted at the same time!! And I went back to edit, and then my 3 year old needed something... anyway, I was going to change the post!!

Firstly, this kind of a piece is very infrequently set as an ABRSM piece, and at the speed indicated in the AMEB publication (which is nutso for Grade 6) it would be harder than any Grade 7 ABRSM piece I've seen. But it's also waaaay harder than most AMEB Grade 6 pieces because of this nutso tempo.

Secondly, this is a study - it's designed to be studied, not sight read!! There are plenty of Grade 6 pieces teachers could have a halfway decent attempt at sight reading at tempo (or close to) but this is certainly not one of them - mostly because it's designed to be worked on over and over again until the particular patterns (LH) are in muscle memory as well as being understood by the intellect.

But I still don't understand why your teacher would play you this piece as sight reading. That seems very odd to me. If I have a student ask me to play something that I can't play I tell them to listen to a recording or check out YouTube in the meantime, and I'll practice it for the next lesson. But beyond that, I don't sit around playing pieces for my students unless I have a specific purpose that will be fulfilled by playing the piece - and I wouldn't know the specific purpose unless I could already perform the piece prior to the commencement of the lesson.

When a teacher gives a demonstration of a pieces he/she doesn't know well or hasn't learned before, isn't that sight reading? I do that all the time. Unless it's some super advanced piece that I know I'll butcher horribly, I'm up for some sight-reading challenge!

The Czerny study being discussed is NOT level 6. Are you kidding? At level 6 you're doing mid-level sonatinas.

Yeah, it IS actually Grade 6 in the Australian Music Examination Board. Other pieces at this level are Puck by Grieg, the Bach Sinfonia 15 (in B minor), Chopin's Raindrop Prelude...

But the latest series of published exam repertoire from the AMEB is not very coherently graded..... (in regard to the rest of their extensive syllabus).

So, now AZNpiano I'm interested in why you sight read pieces to YOUR students! Why don't you prepare the repertoire in advance, or, what do you accomplish for your students by sightreading the material rather than knowing it? (I feel like I might sound like I'm asking silly questions here???!)

Just to give an idea of the AMEB (Australian) grade levels I'll use what I call the "Bach index".
Gr 4 Bach 2 part Inventions 1, 4
Gr 5 Bach 2 part Inventions - rest of
Gr 6 Any of 3 part Inventions
Gr 7 Preludes and Fugues eg 847 850 851 866...others

There are other JSBach works on offer for each grade as well but this may give some idea. Especially as I'm not sure what mid-level sonatinas AZN may be refering to.

I'm not as familiar with Gr 8 list or beyond.

I sometimes feel self-conscious about the level of my abilities in teaching. It was ok when i started because all students were beginners. But then they gradually got better! I have to put quite a lot of work into practising pieces for some of my students these days. On the bright side, oh my goodness my Sight reading has improved

As others have said, the tempo will make a difference to difficulty and I don't really mind if there are variations within a grade, as long as there is a good selection of real music, and plenty to choose from. Then the student learns and develops. Interesting to hear your thoughts on series 16 elissa (haven't used these books yet).

On the variations within a grade issue: I think it really does matter if one piece is a Grade Two piece and another is a Preliminary piece and they are both in the Preliminary syllabus - it renders the idea of 'passing' Preliminary a nonsense (which Preliminary did the student pass???).

But I don't think the AMEB has taken a good look at tempo as increasing the level of difficulty over the past 10-15 years - and this is a really big issue regarding an appropriate standard of performance for any particular grade.....

Drifting a little OT. Which piece is the Gr2 one in the preliminary elissa?

I haven't been affected by variability very much because I do not use exams much. I assume a committee of teachers have voted the pieces in, so someone thinks the level is right for each piece. Do you (and others ) give feedback to the ameb when levels are not appropriate?

thanks

This grading system really does need some rethinking. If you're going to use two grade levels to differentiate the Inventions, then you need level 6 and 7 to encompass the French Suites, Level 8 and 9 for the Symphonias and easier Preludes/Fugues, etc.

John, the French Suites are in the mix (the Polonaise from the 6th suite is Grade Three, the Courantes from Suites 5 and 6 are listed for Grade Five, the Gigue from Suite 3 is listed for Grade Six) some preludes from the Small Preludes and Fugues (BWV 934, 938 and 940 are listed for Grade Four, BWV 928, 936 and 943 - preludes only - are listed for Grade Six).

The placement of the first Invention at Grade Four standard has been the practice of the AMEB, ABRSM and Trinity College through the second half of the 20th century, and the 4th Invention is usually positioned here as well. Mostly the Invention in F (no.8) is considered to be Grade Five, and both the aforementioned UK-based exam boards have set the Invention in A minor (13) and in B flat (14) at Grade 6 at some stage in the past 40 years.

Canonie, the Grade 2 standard piece in the Series 16 book is the Khatchaturian "Skipping Rope": it requires stretches of a sixth from white to black note, quick changes in hand position if the student cannot stretch an octave (which at Preliminary would be standard), contrasting articulations between the hands with contrasting rhythmic figures (including minims tied to quavers), and all at an immense speed with lots of moves between white and black positions. This would be appropriately graded at Grade 2 - compare it to Kabalevsky's Clowning Around for instance, or Bartok's Rhythmic Dance.

Thank you elissa. It does sound out of place in prelim. And I know the Bartok which has similar stretches and movements, but at least without contrasting articulations between hands! I'll keep a look out for this skipping rope. I assume it won't take examiners too long to notice that no-one is presenting it in exams.

On a similar note, I've noticed the Piano For Leisure syllabus has many pieces that only suit a decent sized hand (clearly meant for older beginners).

Sorry John for not providing all pieces. One day the AMEB will put the syllabus online and then it will be easy to compare across national boundaries. It will make discussion easier!

edit: found it on Utube. My guess is that this is slower than marked as I can imagine a large hand grade 1 could play it. But I'm only guessing, and glad to defer to larger experience in this. I really like the piece though.
skipping rope

Just to add to the Bach index for further comparison:

Gr 8: Sarabande and Double 4th mvnt and Gigue 6th mvnt from Suite ('English') No 6, Courante and Sarabande from Partita No 1, plus many of the prelude and fugues

Associate: Partitas BWV 826, 828; Many prelude and Fugues..

Licentiate: More prelude and Fugues, Fantasia and Fugue in Eminor, Toccatas BWV 910, 911, 912...

I've also noticed that the Piano for Leisure syllabus has many pieces with quite complex rhythms at lower grade levels. Often more complex than the equivalent Grade in the normal syllabus.

Yes I've noticed that too. I think it's a good thing. My students have more groove than I have; their struggles tend to be with other things than rhythm and syncopation.

Canonie - that performance is nearly half the speed listed in the publication.... It is supposed to go CRAZY fast.....!!!! And the Bartok has none of the hand position issues that Skipping Rope has. But it's a brilliant piece - just teach it to your G2 students!!

LimeFriday - I reckon the level of difficulty in the Piano for Leisure syllabus is a good half a grade harder than it is in the standard Piano syllabus. Of course, teachers and students alike will still think it's easier to prepare for because of the reduced number of pieces, the reduced scale/arpeggio requirement and being able to choose either sight reading or ear tests.... And hard to read isn't the same as hard to play - which is why some of the 'complex' rhythms in jazz-style pieces are easily mastered by kids who can't manage Skipping Rope!!!

Elissa - I've noticed that too - that the jazz style pieces are taken on and played with a great deal of enthusiasm and the rhythms which are hard to read and to count initially for the kids - can be more easily taught than more something like Skipping Rope. But still not 'easy'!

Canonie - definitely true about the kids having more groove I have one young one that likes to 'dance' while playing. Very cute. And she has great rhythm and timing.

Haha! I have a new kid who does a bench-groove-shuffle after every single thing he plays - like gently doing the twist sitting down. I think he likes piano! So last lesson, I couldn't resist any longer and I twisted and grooved along with him. His mother burst out laughing hehe. Felt pretty good actually.

Elissa I love that Bartok Rhythmic Dance. It was one of the first things I chose to play when I got myself a teacher last year, and now I enjoy it with students (thanks for putting it in your book).


That's quite funny in light of alanchan's recent thread on Pianist Corner - maybe he needs to post the superhero version as well as his merely human version.
No prelim student could play that piece at that tempo. "Choose a musically appropriate tempo for your performance" definitely applies.