|
Post by princessmoose on May 28, 2006 21:58:37 GMT
Was it not Cambridge?
|
|
|
Post by Steve Hopwood on May 28, 2006 22:04:23 GMT
Of course it was. Did some idiot suggest Oxford. Honestly, some people.....................
|
|
|
Post by princessmoose on May 28, 2006 22:06:17 GMT
Of course it was. Did some idiot suggest Oxford. Honestly, some people..................... You're not quite with it today Steve are you? Are you going to remember which accompaniments to practice for my grade 8? Or do I need to write it out on your head for you so you see it everytime you look in a mirror?
|
|
|
Post by Steve Hopwood on May 28, 2006 22:10:32 GMT
Of course it was. Did some idiot suggest Oxford. Honestly, some people..................... You're not quite with it today Steve are you? Are you going to remember which accompaniments to practice for my grade 8? Or do I need to write it out on your head for you so you see it everytime you look in a mirror? Accompaniments? They were by 'The L. Ron Hubbard of Music', weren't they? I had to improvise them on the harp whilst you improvised on the drums (feet) and cello (hands) whilst sight-singing them throught your ears whilst your mouth improvised on the bugle. We pianists have it so easy. Steve
|
|
|
Post by princessmoose on May 28, 2006 22:12:08 GMT
Well done, you remembered correctly . Old age isn't defeating you too much .
|
|
|
Post by Steve Hopwood on May 28, 2006 22:16:48 GMT
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by anacrusis on May 28, 2006 22:48:32 GMT
So why then have I felt so much more confident about playing in general since I seriously started aural, sight singing, and especially 'The L. Ron Hubbard of Music'. If singing was done properly in schools this would never be a problem. Granted, that's not much help to those already let down by this system and are faced with aural tests, but I don't think anyone is completely incapable of doing it, as much as they might think they are. Solfege is the best thing I learned in this respect, others use interval recognition, whatever works for them. I'm not saying anyone who can't do this is a bad musician, simply doing so. Try it, it works, and that is what AB aural is trying to encourage. Anyway, I'll get off my soapbox now and give you all peace. Neil, I'm sure you're right on the learning to sing properly at school thing - I was lucky enough to have had good teaching, can sing at sight in a limited way, and have never had many problems with aural tests. I can't say I much like the sound of my singing voice, and although we always sang to the kids when they were smaller, I didn't like doing that if we were overheard. More importantly - I do know people who curl up with embarrassment at the idea of singing in public. That is why I asked if interval recognition could be tested another way.
|
|
|
Post by jod on Jun 5, 2006 9:22:50 GMT
TG are simply moving with the times. It is some considerable time since I last taught a piano student child happy to sing in their piano lesson. Singers do so quite happily. This has been a gradual process. When I started my career back in the mid 70's, kids were much more used to singing than they are now. Back then, there was little resistance to singing. This resistance has gradually increased. 30 years is a long time; now the average piano student would rather be tortured than sing. Only because they do not understand what torture is, mind you. ;D Taking this seriously, I am sorry Neil, but why should pianists sing if they do not want to? Putting it bluntly, the piano is a magnificent instrument that both sings and provides its own accompaniment. Compared to this, the voice is a pale apology for an instrument. Why should pianists put up with second best? Steve Steve I know you are a pianist, but please do not knock the beauty of the human voice. In the right hands it is a beautiful instrument capabale of great expressive variety. It works well unaccompanied and can be beguiling, It can take a variety of accompaniements, including the Piano with all it's nuances too. But I do agree with the reluctance of people to sing. With my own boys its not a problem. Singing has been around with them from day 1 and probably inuetro! To encourage my othe pupils, who have the added intimidation that their teacher is a concert soprano, I tell them its not the quality of the sound that matters rather the accuracy of the response. Its seems to work.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Hopwood on Jun 5, 2006 20:12:23 GMT
Steve I know you are a pianist, but please do not knock the beauty of the human voice. In the right hands it is a beautiful instrument capabale of great expressive variety. It works well unaccompanied and can be beguiling, It can take a variety of accompaniements, including the Piano with all it's nuances too. I wrote 'second best' not 'second rate', Jo. I would be a strange advocate for my instrument if I did not think it were the best going. ;D I take back my statement, "Compared to this, the voice is a pale apology for an instrument." I replace it with "Compared to this, the all others are pale apologies for an instrument." Don't really mean it, of course. I just think the piano is the best. Steve
|
|
|
Post by anacrusis on Jun 5, 2006 21:24:40 GMT
Steve I know you are a pianist, but please do not knock the beauty of the human voice. In the right hands it is a beautiful instrument capabale of great expressive variety. It works well unaccompanied and can be beguiling, It can take a variety of accompaniements, including the Piano with all it's nuances too. But I do agree with the reluctance of people to sing. With my own boys its not a problem. Singing has been around with them from day 1 and probably inuetro! To encourage my othe pupils, who have the added intimidation that their teacher is a concert soprano, I tell them its not the quality of the sound that matters rather the accuracy of the response. Its seems to work. My mind is boggling at hand-held voices.... ;D Not all voices are beautiful, though, and whilst singing can be fun to do, it isn't always good to listen to. Doing singing exercises in aural tests will be advantageous for those who have a good instrument, and know how to control it. The tests effectively demand facility on an instrument which is not the candidate's preferred one, and I think that is where those of us who favour alternative tests are coming from.
|
|
|
Post by jod on Jun 6, 2006 10:04:45 GMT
Funnily enough, I welcome the alternative tests. They test different aspects of musicality. I have enough students who find aural tests difficult to want to give them an alternative, just as I have some equally retiscent sight readers.
Steve, as a singer just as your a pianist, I love the instrument I have. And I have heard some pretty awful singers... but then I've heard bad pianists too.
|
|
|
Post by annc on Jun 30, 2006 20:40:43 GMT
I like the look of the Trinity syllabus too. But having entered a candidate for a First Concert Certificate in March I will never use them again. Unlike AB, the local rep organises the exam timetable. Having discussed with him the availability of our accompanist, and his having agreed a mutually suitable time...the appointment came through fairly last minute at a completely different time, when said accompanist was playing for my AB exams. Student then had to rehearse immediately before the exam with a pianist she had never met - without me being there as I was 25 miles away with the15 who were doing AB exams. Was there a happy ending? Sort of. She got 81%, but we still haven't had the certificate. Local rep won't return my phone calls, so I rang London. They sent him the certificate in April(!). He rang tonight because London had got on to him. Seems he has had the certificate since April, but there is an error on it. He a) hasn't told me about this, and b) has still not returned it for correction because he has been too busy (!) with next sessions exams and changing jobs, so it "hasn't exactly been on my list of priorities"! Grrrrr! Trinity? Never again! At least I e-mail AB with my preferred date for our accompanist and we've had it every single time, with about three weeks notice. I know AB is a dirty word on here (well, the forum anyway), but they do know how to organise exams.
|
|
|
Post by princessmoose on Jun 30, 2006 21:04:41 GMT
That's unfortunate you've had that experience, and I guess that every board has it's problems. I did not get what I asked for at all with AB this session and it wasn't much, but heyho, I will see what TG brings.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Hopwood on Jun 30, 2006 21:25:13 GMT
annc, I hope you give TG another chance. They have so many advantages. Tis a fact, though, that how successful the experience is depends on the local rep - a different situation to the centralised AB. A good local rep makes TG brilliant. A bad one makes them a near-disaster. Here, Doncaster and Stingythorpe are equidistant. We go to Doncaster to escape the lunacy of the Stingythorpe rep and to enjoy the enthusiasm, expertise and support of the Doncaster one. Is there a different TG centre nearby? Can you talk to candidates\teachers that use it, to find out how good it is? Steve
|
|
|
Post by annc on Jul 1, 2006 8:00:46 GMT
The next one, I believe, is another 25 miles on top of where we were allocated last time. Although we live where there's an examining centre - he actually gave us one 25 miles up the M5! I think rep is going to have to retire before I put my toe in the water again. It's so costly for the students - accompanists charge more if they have to travel further.
|
|