Hello all,

I've heard it said that there is actually a formal system established in the teaching of western classical music by which you can determine a piece's "grade" level.

So, two part question.

1. Is there a musical "grading" system for determining which "year" a piano student is in, judged by what they can do and what they know, and not just by how long they've been studying?

2. Is there a related system for determining which "grade" a particular piece is suitable for?

Thank you so much, in advance.
Dino.

Here are some links. I don't know if it will answer your questions(?)

http://www.abrsm.org/resources/perfDip05Part2.pdf
(These are the advanced pieces; on the ABRSM pages you'll find link to their 1-8 grading)

http://www.bccmexaminations.ca/syllabus.html

http://www.pianoworld.com/Uploads/files/Graded_Pieces_Sorted_By_Difficulty.PDF

If nobody else is going to say thank you
to buxtehude for the great links ... I'd like to convey a special vote of appreciation for a
real eye-opener grading of all keyboard classics.

Thanks again buxtehude.

You're welcome.

Just saw the lists.

Excellent. Thank you buxtehude!

Okay, I have a question: what do those grades refer to? Say, a grade 7 piece is a piece that a piano student should be able to play after 7 years of playing piano, right?

No, just a grading from easy to difficult, beginner to advanced.

Wow, this is great. I have a very hard time telling what is within my range and what isn't, so sometimes I suggest things that make my teacher have to summon up her most creative ways of kindly telling me "Too hard." Now I can check the list before I ask.

Nancy

buxtehude,

It wasn't that the links weren't helpful that I remained silent, but I have a practice for internet interactions. If I give somebody a link, I give them some kind of context and info. so that they don't have to do "all" the work and exploration themselves. Since I know what I'm posting in the link, it's not that hard to do.

When you hardly answered my question in any way, I just looked at it as, a ton of hard work that you didn't even think was worth the 3 minutes it takes to write an intro to, or to write a summery of how it addresses my question.

Later in the thread, somebody asked another question, which essentially restated my original, and you did answer that. Why not just answer the original with two or three sentences.

Even though there was no introduction I did open all the links and got from it what I could.

I just think that there's so much work on the internet, and in life, if we really are trying to be helpful we can at least give brief summaries of what we're offering since we know ourselves already. I don't know, just seems like a kind and productive way to be.

D.

hum, let this be a lesson to those trying to use sign language on a chat board.

Alright, D, I got so angry, reading your answer, that I'm sure the moderators would have shown me the door if I hadn't deleted my post in time. Now I'm calm again.

I'll add my thanks to the chorus. Since I'm studying on my own, one of the hardest things for me to do is find pieces that are challenging for the level I'm at while at the same time being playable. To this point, I've relied on having an "ear out" when listening to classical CD's and music on the radio for pieces that "sound" about right - problematic at best. The grading system really helps and I've already identified a couple of pieces I want to take on.

Thanks much for the links. Glad you deleted your angry retort, it's great having helpful people like you around!

For the web impared, try Maurice Hinson's book, Guide to Pianist's Literature, and for intermediate level material, Jane McGrath's book of similar title.

It is an interesting list that Buxty posted. I enjoyed having a cruise through. I don't necesarily agree with the gradings of some pieces I know (for example I would list the Chopin Nocturnes in a different order). Horses for courses I suppose. A

The gradings on that list are horribly inaccurate, for example they say Chopin's 3rd prelude is harder than his 8th? That's like saying an ant hill is taller than mount everest.