Pre-U Music, Paper 11, Section A

The ultimate goal, at least for the most able students, is to be able to listen to the two performances,

select important features of the performances for comparison, comment on the effect of these

differences and use their understanding of performance practice to inform their observations.

This is a demanding task, and the skill of doing this will be built up over two years. Initially, students

may well be taught to identify the differences between the performances without commenting on

the effect these differences have. This could usefully be done in bullet point form, or by using a table

like the following:

RECORDING 1

RECORDING 2

Tempo

Dynamics

Instruments

Phrasing

Articulation

Balance

Ornamentation

Other issues

A second stage could be to comment on the effect of the differences, e.g. “the slower tempo in the

first performance adds to the melancholy mood of the movement, whereas the faster tempo in the

second performance allows for a greater sense of line in the phrasing”.

Students should also be taught about current understanding of performing practice (see the

comprehensive reading list in the Teachers Guide, to which can be added to the two excellent books

with accompanying CD published by the ABRSM, “A Performers Guide to Music of the Baroque

Period” and “A Performers Guide to Music of the Classical Period”, both edited by Anthony Burton.)

As they progress through the course, they should be shown how to use their increasing knowledge

of performance practice to inform their answers.

As they become more experienced, they should be taught how to select from their listening the

features that are the most interesting and important for the given recordings. (The specimen mark

scheme perhaps gives the impression that ornamentation should be a particular focus – this was

unintentional; it is one of many areas that could be covered.)

Whilst there is no expectation that candidates should answer in any one particular format, early

indications from our students’ work might indicate that a thematic approach – ie one in which the

issue of e.g. tempo is addressed for both performances in turn, rather than one in which a report of

everything connected with performance 1 is followed by a report on performance 2 – is easier for

the students to handle.

The generic mark scheme in the specimen paper is obviously designed for answers submitted after

two years of study. In order to give helpful, but also motivating marks to students, it could perhaps

be modified (initially by removing the reference to performance practice) for use in the first part of

Lower 6th

year, to acknowledge that early answers will probably focus more on details than reasons,

e.g.:

Descriptors Marks

A thorough and detailed comparison, demonstrating excellent aural perception

of interpretative differences.

21–24

A detailed comparison demonstrating good aural perception of interpretative

differences.

16–20

A fairly detailed comparison demonstrating moderately good aural perception of

interpretative differences.

11–15

Some aural awareness of interpretative differences in an uneven comparison. 6–10

A little aural awareness of a few differences. 1–5

No attempt to compare the recordings. 0