Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Adult Beginners Forum PianoMarvel: What does the SASR mean according to grades?

I'm trying to improve my sight reading. Right now I feel it is really terrible, and I'm getting around 500-550 on the SASR. For those who have some experience with this, what grade level do the PianoMarvel levels correspond to? All they have is

Early beginner 100-200
Late beginner: 200-300
Early intermediate: 300-400
Late intermediate: 400-500
Early advanced: 500-600
Advanced: 600+

But I have no clue what these mean.

No idea, but I remember Josh Wright saying he scored around 1800. The list below shows others scoring around the same, those I would consider advanced. 600 for an advanced threshold seems a bit low to me ...

https://pianomarvel.com/sight-reading-project

I think a lot of piano professors might score above 1800. I checked it out, and that is extremely difficult, above 1400 or so you have to sightread Bach fugues and similar things.

I think 500 can be considered late beginner, based on the below. See chart. There are examples for each level as well.

http://standardassessmentofsightreading.com/sight_reading_test_samples/

Thanks. Did you check the examples? What level would you expect someone at grade 5/8 ABRSM to read at?

I'm not familiar with ABRSM so it's hard to say. Below is a link to an example I had to do for the RCM 7 exam, which is probably close to level 7, 8 shown in the examples in the above link.

https://imgur.com/a/FPdcvwg

The RCM level 7 one looks like it's at about a level 6 according to the SASR. What tempo would you be expected to play it at?

As written, Andantino. It's expected that you respect all markings on the score. I feel the left hand in the on the river example is much easier though.

You typically should read 1 to 2 levels below your current grade. So if you are grade 5 abrsm, you should read pieces that are around grade 3 to 4.

I have heard this advice often, but don't you think it is an upper bound rather than a rule?

If I'm grade 8, then can I read a grade 7 piece at tempo? Say Schubert Impromptu op 90 no 2? In the app, you at supposed to sight read along with a metronome. If it is indeed true, I feel really crappy about my sight reading skills, because I often find it hard to sightread a grade 1 piece such as Bach Menuet in G, because having a different line in the left vs right hand can throw me off. I can only sight read well predictable stuff such as some Czerny etudes.

If you look at the example Bb(C)yclist sent, it looks closer to grade 3, and is easier to sight read because they intentionally avoid part writing and instead alternate hands. And that is for the grade 7 exam.

That feels really hard to read! How many mistakes could you get away with? Would you expect a student to be near perfect, or to omit things as necessary to read it at tempo? If most grade 7 students can read that well, then I find that rather scary.

I have heard this advice often, but don't you think it is an upper bound rather than a rule?

If I'm grade 8, then can I read a grade 7 piece at tempo? Say Schubert Impromptu op 90 no 2? In the app, you at supposed to sight read along with a metronome. If it is indeed true, I feel really crappy about my sight reading skills, because I often find it hard to sightread a grade 1 piece such as Bach Menuet in G, because having a different line in the left vs right hand can throw me off. I can only sight read well predictable stuff such as some Czerny etudes.

If you look at the example Bb(C)yclist sent, it looks closer to grade 3, and is easier to sight read because they intentionally avoid part writing and instead alternate hands. And that is for the grade 7 exam.[/quote]


Well like all guidelines it is an average. In practice people have various sight reading skills. With sight reading or reading, a lot depends on your familiarity with the style of the composer. The more you are familiar, the less surprising the mouvements are and therefore you are more comfortable. It is definitely a question of practice and then a question of technical ability as well. ie the piece must be very easy to play technically for you. You cant sight read well a piece which you cant play easily, ie immediately. Hence the rule of the 1 (for me more like 2) grade difference.

Also, You cant sight read well a piece if you dont read the notes/patterns fast enough, and that does not depend on your technical level.

How fast is it realistic to expect to be able to read the notes or patterns? I find that to be an incredibly limiting factor. I don't really have technical limitations when it comes to anything I can nearly sightread. I just can't figure out how to decide the patterns fast enough.

That's why you should sight read a great variety of different styles. Bach is good for multi-part reading but rather predictable rhythmically. Other composers have different styles that teach different things. I think Schumann op. 68 is excellent for building reading skills as he writes a lot in multiple parts and the rhyhm is more interesting than the Baroque or Classical composers. Bartok Mikrokosmos is very good too because the harmonic language is different and unexpected.

But like I wrote above, you should try to explore many different styles to get better at reading them and over time it really does get easier.

Czerny etudes are one of the least useful things to sight read as they are essentially just finger exercises that are musically brain-dead simple.

I have all the RCM sight reading books and I think this example is not really representative. In general, I found they tend to write their sight reading exercises more horizontally. However, they like to put in rhythmic surprises and that's something that often throws me off sometimes.

I wouldn't really worry so much about level. At every level there are pieces that I find more difficult to read and others that are easy. Everyone has some strengths and weaknesses and your aim should be to address your weaknesses. I often try to read pieces that are above what I can read comfortably, like Grieg Lyric pieces, and I have to slow down and even stop but I don't really worry about that because they still sound nice and I'm having fun reading them. I think I made significant progress reading even more difficult stuff.

So stop obsessing about level and just do it.

Ranjit some types of music is easier to sight read than others. In general, baroque music like minuet in G (afaik it's by petzgold not Bach) i think is the hardest period to sight read. It has multiple voices and long phrases.

I do agree with sidokar who says this is related to experience of the era. I am picking mostly only baroque and classical era to counter years of mostly romantic era pieces.

For piano exams, even at the highest grade, the expectation is only to play a few bars so it's not as though a diploma level pianist can sight read all pieces at grade 6. To master this skill, you need to develop other skills. I am a good sight reader but baroque music can be impossible to sight read. If I have the fingerings, and not a blank urtext, then it is more doable. Otherwise I'd have to work them out.

I have seen an advanced pianist they play through a baroque score and they normally start by quickly stopping at all awkward passages to work out best fingerings. I still rely on my teacher and lessons for this as I feel if you learn the best fingerings for you at the start it solves most issues.

It's the start of a famous piece Im sure. Maybe someone classical era?

You'd have to ask an RCM examiner for their rubric ;0 My second teacher worked in Toronto and for RCM, and my third teacher was also very familiar with RCM. Things they looks for are rhythm, not stopping and paying attention to the markings (tempo, dynamics, etc) on the score. Don't worry so much about wrong notes.

Question - can you learn to play the example say within 5 tries? I have the RCM Sight Reading books as well and too me they are short studies. I don't care if I can play it the first time around, but I should be able to play it reasonably well after 5 (or use whatever # you like). What the tells me is that I won't spend an infinite amount of time learning the piece. I don't have infinite time.

Yes, I can. But I wouldn't be able to sight read it well if you forced me to play it with a metronome. I can read the patterns well enough at tempo, but I might pause at some points.

It depends. I'm not able to read very thick polyphonic stuff like fugues but I have read many of the Bach chorales, starting with only the soprano and bass then adding other voices, and now I don't find that style to be harder than others. I have more trouble reading many accidentals or unexpected jumps and hand crosses than reading multiple voices in counter-point. It just goes to show that you have to read different styles to get good at reading those styles.

So what's the problem with that? Sounds good enough to me. Don't over complicate things, Ranjit ;0 Nobody is going to force you to do anything, unless you allow it. When I do these RCM sight reading exercises I count out loud. If you haven't seen them, then have you do a lot of counting/clapping, etc, which really does help. Read new music across different styles everyday and in 50 years it won't be a problem ;0