I understand the grading of music by difficulty, and that there are different organizations with potentially slightly differing grade lists. That part I got

What I don't quite get is what it means when saying a person is "at" a certain level.

I realize everyone is different, but in general...If you are "at" level 'x', does that mean that you can generally play level 'x' pieces with just a bit of work (a week's worth of practice?), or does that mean that level 'x' pieces are 'project pieces' taking many week's study, but you can sight read level 'y' pieces and knock out level 'z' pieces in a week?

I ask this because when I took lessons as a kid, I was never involved in a program where levels were mentioned. I did 'state piano contest' (the ones thru the state school districts) and local auditions, but with those one did not move up from one level to another, you were just given I - V ratings on performance of the given pieces each year. I seem to have done pieces of a variety of different levels "out of order" I suspect that my teacher was picking pieces geared to my individual strengths and weaknesses, which is as it should be.

But I've never been able to say, "I reached such-and-such a level"...and, mostly for the purposes of online discussions, I'd like to have a better understanding.

Can someone enlighten me?

This is such a tough thing to answer, but here goes. A person who can be said to be at level "x" can display most or all of certain criteria in technique, general reading ability, and be able to play certain kinds of pieces. It can't really be defined much clearer than that, which unfortunately is about as clear as mud. Generally, the more difficult the pieces you are able to learn, the longer they will take to learn simply because they get more complicated.

I think I understand why you want to know this, but really, you will just have to be comfortable with the fact that you are where you are. At any given point, there will be someone behind you, and someone in front of you, and someone along side you.

Really, the *only* gauge somewhat accurate as yo where a person is, is to look at the repertoire they are playing. And ideally, to hear them to see if they are playing it well. Then you might have an idea.

As a side note, I had the opportunity to have lunch with a professor and musician recently whose husband is a performer at the national/international level (was with Canadian Brass until he went solo). She thought it interesting that he always felt he was "at the beginning." She found that the very best performers think themselves "just starting" in their musicianship.

I'm all for using levels and gauges to help my students improve, but I think I'm going to try the other mindset for myself.

Well, if you are in the state of California, our teachers' association publishes a Syllabus that grades pieces from level preparatory all the way to level Advanced, for a total of 11 levels.

For example, Clementi Sonatina Op. 36 No. 1 would be Level 3 or 4, Kuhlau Sonatina Op. 55 No. 1 woule be Level 5. Mozart K. 545 would be Level 6 or 7.

I know it's terribly flawed, and there are "Level 9" pieces that are quite easy, but ranking pieces is a subjective process, anyway.

ABRSM and Trinity also have their syllabus on the net. Check out what you can sight read with ease - that is roughly two grades below where you are. A piece that takes a couple of months of 10 - 15 minutes practice a day to get to concert standard, is, again really roughly, where you are.

certianly the higher level you are the better pianist you are, it gets easier to read and learn music... but also as the levels go up the difficulties of the pieces go up... so its not necessarily that you are learning quicker... though also on the flip side, different pieces in the same level can also be different difficulties... does this make any sense? it's a hard question to answer...

Ah-HAH! There we go...thanks keyboardklutz.

I realize this question is about impossible to answer definitively, but this gives me a good ballpark as to what it means.