HSC Music 2 common mistakes
HSC Music 2 · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
In the performance elective, the candidate announces a programme of three or four works and then performs only excerpts, stopping each piece after the first page or first 90 seconds instead of presenting complete works or the full duration required by the chosen elective.
Candidates rehearse openings most often and run out of secure material later in each piece, so under exam pressure they retreat to what feels safe. They also misjudge how long the required programme must run and assume short excerpts will be accepted.
What to do instead
Build a timed programme map early: list every work with its exact duration and confirm the total against the elective requirements. Rehearse full run-throughs with a stopwatch at least weekly, and mark the two or three bars where memory or technique is weakest so those passages get isolated slow practice. In the exam, commit to performing complete works as prepared rather than improvising cuts.
The candidate's programme contains works that are all in the same style, key area or texture (for example four Romantic piano pieces, or three works for the same instrument at a similar level), leaving no evidence of contrast or breadth.
Students prepare what they enjoy and what their teacher assigned for the last recital, without checking the programme against the marking criteria for variety of style, period and character.
What to do instead
Before finalising, tabulate each work by composer, period, genre, tempo and character. If two works occupy the same cell, replace one. Aim for at least one contrast in period or style, one contrast in tempo or mood, and, where the elective allows, one contrast in ensemble or instrumentation. Write a one-line rationale for each work so the choice is defensible.
In the composition portfolio, the candidate submits a piece built from a short loop or four-chord pattern repeated with only dynamic changes, with no developed melodic material, no structural contrast and no notated score that matches the recording.
Candidates compose at the instrument or in a DAW by layering, which encourages repetition, and they underestimate how much development and notation the portfolio criteria demand. Notation is often transcribed hastily at the end and diverges from the audio.
What to do instead
Plan an explicit form before writing: sketch a bar chart showing introduction, statement, development, contrast and return. Force at least two developmental techniques (sequence, inversion, rhythmic diminution, reharmonisation, textural change) into the middle section. Produce the score first or alongside the recording, then proofread the score against the audio bar by bar for pitch, rhythm, articulation and tempo markings.
The candidate's submitted score omits essential performance information, such as clefs and key signatures on every system, tempo and expression marks, dynamics, articulation, phrase slurs, bowing or breath marks, and instrumentation, so the work cannot be realised by another performer.
Composers who work aurally or in software assume the listener will infer their intentions, and notation software defaults are left unchecked. Candidates also run out of time and submit a draft engraving.
What to do instead
Use a pre-submission notation checklist covering title and instrumentation, clefs and key signatures, tempo and character indications, dynamics, articulation and phrasing, rehearsal marks, and final barline. Have another musician sight-read the score silently and list every ambiguity; correct each one before submission.
In the musicology elective, the candidate writes an essay that retells the life of the composer and lists biographical anecdotes, with only a sentence or two actually analysing the set works or answering the question asked.
Biographical material is easy to memorise and feels authoritative, and students confuse showing knowledge with answering the question. Time pressure then crowds out the analysis they planned.
What to do instead
Practise a fixed paragraph architecture: a thesis that answers the question directly, then body paragraphs each built on a musical point supported by a specific quotation (bar numbers, chord, motive, instrumentation, texture), then a conclusion that returns to the thesis. Cap background context at one or two sentences and check every paragraph for a bar-numbered example.
The candidate describes musical events in vague impressionistic language, writing that a passage is 'emotional', 'dramatic' or 'builds tension', without naming the specific musical devices, bar locations or notational evidence that produce the effect.
Students rely on their emotional response to the work and lack a technical vocabulary for harmony, texture, rhythm, timbre and form. They also study without the score in front of them, so they cannot cite detail.
What to do instead
Build a personal device bank: for each topic (for example modulation, pedal point, ostinato, sequence, chromaticism, instrumentation, rhythmic displacement) write a definition, an aural signature and one example from a set work with bar numbers. In every analytical sentence, pair the effect with the cause, using the pattern 'the effect is produced by X at bar Y'.
The candidate misidentifies intervals, chords or cadences in the aural paper, for example calling a perfect fourth a perfect fifth, labelling a first-inversion triad as root position, or naming a plagal cadence as perfect.
Candidates practise recognition by shape or by singing from the lower note only, and they do not systematically check the upper note or the bass. In chords they listen to the top note rather than the bass, and cadence identification is rushed before the final two chords are heard.
What to do instead
Adopt a fixed procedure for every item: sing or hum the lower note, then the upper, then count the semitones and name the quality before writing. For chords, identify the bass note first, then the interval structure above it. For cadences, wait for the final two chords, sing the bass line, and decide the cadence type from the bass motion. Drill with a partner or app in short daily sessions.
The candidate notates a melodic dictation with correct pitches but wrong rhythm, or correct rhythm with wrong pitches, and writes no key signature or an incorrect one, so the transcription cannot be marked as accurate.
Listeners attend to the dimension they find easier and neglect the other, and they try to write everything on the first hearing rather than using the given playings strategically.
What to do instead
Use a three-pass method: first pass, establish key, metre, tempo and overall shape, and write the key signature and bar lines; second pass, notate rhythm only, tapping the pulse; third pass, fill in pitches against the rhythm. Leave space for each bar, use pencil, and check the final note against the tonic before handing in.
The candidate answers extended-response questions in the aural and musicology papers without referring to the excerpt or set work actually presented, giving a generic prepared response that could apply to any piece.
Students memorise model paragraphs and hope to reuse them, and they fear running out of time so they start writing before listening carefully or planning.
What to do instead
Force specificity: begin each response by noting the forces, texture, tempo and one striking feature heard in the excerpt, then build the argument from those observations. Practise under timed conditions with unfamiliar excerpts so the habit of citing what is actually heard becomes automatic.
The candidate mismanages exam timing, spending too long on early short-answer aural questions or on the first musicology essay, then leaving the final extended response, the composition rationale or the performance programme notes incomplete or unanswered.
Candidates have not rehearsed under full exam conditions, so they cannot estimate how long each section takes, and perfectionism on early items consumes the budget.
What to do instead
Before the exam, write a minute-by-minute allocation based on the mark value of each section and rehearse full papers with a visible clock. In the exam, write the target finish time for each section at the top of the page, move on when the target passes, and reserve the last ten minutes for checking and completing any unfinished response.