The Unplayable Extension
A Year 11 student is preparing a performance for the school's assessment recital. The chosen repertoire is a transcription for solo marimba of a violin caprice. The original is marked presto with continuous semiquavers; the transcription preserves the tempo marking and the semiquaver figuration but adds four-mallet chords that the student cannot play cleanly above crotchet = 100. The student can play the piece accurately at crotchet = 84 and has three weeks until the recital. The program note the student drafted says the work will be performed 'at the composer's tempo'. The teacher must advise on tempo, program note, and program construction, given the recital allows one work of up to six minutes and the student's current timing at 84 is 5 minutes 50 seconds.
1. Advise the student on the tempo decision, weighing accuracy against fidelity to the score.
Read the worked answer
The governing principle is that a secure, accurate performance at a slightly reduced tempo is worth more than a ragged one at the marked tempo. Markers reward control, tone, and musical shaping; semiquaver passages that are uneven or chordal attacks that are fluffed will cost more than a 16-beat-per-minute tempo reduction.
However, the reduction is not free. At crotchet = 84 the piece runs 5:50, which is close to the six-minute limit and leaves almost no margin for a slower acoustic, a hesitant start, or a ritardando. Two options:
- Set a target of crotchet = 88–92 and practise to that, accepting some simplification of the four-mallet chords (redistribute or omit inner notes) so the semiquaver flow stays even. This preserves more of the presto character.
- Keep 84 but cut or arrange a short passage so the timing drops to about 5:20, giving margin.
What the student should not do is attempt the marked tempo on the day and hope. The teacher should also advise that the program note be changed: claiming 'the composer's tempo' when the performance is at 84 is inaccurate and invites a penalty or an awkward question.
2. Rewrite the program note claim and explain why the original wording is a problem.
Read the worked answer
The original wording - 'performed at the composer's tempo' - is a problem for two reasons. First, it is factually false: the performance is at crotchet = 84, not presto. Second, it draws the marker's attention to the discrepancy, turning a defensible artistic decision into an apparent error.
A better note might read: 'This transcription for solo marimba adapts a violin caprice. The four-mallet chords of the transcription make the original Presto impractical at this stage, and the work is performed at a tempo that allows the semiquaver figuration to remain even and the melodic line to sing.'
This is honest, frames the tempo as a deliberate interpretive choice, and shows the student understands the relationship between the transcription and the original. The principle is that program notes should describe what the audience will actually hear, not what the score says.
3. The student asks whether to add a second, shorter work to the program. Give a recommendation with reasoning.
Read the worked answer
The recital rule allows one work of up to six minutes; the student's current work already runs 5:50. Adding a second work would breach the time limit unless the first is shortened.
The recommendation depends on the student's strengths. If the marimba work is secure and the student's control is the strongest part of their playing, keep the single work and use the spare preparation time to raise the tempo toward 88–92 and to shape the piece. A single well-prepared work demonstrates depth.
If the student's technique is uneven across the piece - for example, strong in the lyrical middle section but weak in the chordal passages - a shorter, contrasting second work (say 2–3 minutes) might show a wider range, but only if the first work is cut to about 3:30. That is a large change with three weeks to go and risks leaving both works underprepared.
Given the timeline, the safer judgement is to keep one work, secure it, and fix the timing margin. Adding repertoire at this stage trades depth for breadth the student cannot consolidate.