Solo Programme Under Time and Endurance Pressure
At a co-educational school, a Year 11 trumpet player is preparing to submit two contrasting pieces for the Level 1 solo performance assessment in Week 9. Her programme currently lists “Trumpet Voluntary” (3:10, accompanied) and a simplified arrangement of “Blue Bossa” (4:40, with a 16-bar improvised solo). She has 25-minute lessons weekly, one 40-minute accompanist rehearsal each Thursday, and shared practice room access only before school. In Week 5 she gets braces adjusted and reports fatigue and inconsistent high-register accuracy after 6 minutes of playing. The teacher notes that the programme is 7 minutes 50 seconds of music, but the assessment evening allows a maximum of 8 minutes including setup. The candidate wants to add a 2-minute unaccompanied fanfare as a third item “for safety”. The department requires a written programme with timings, keys, and accompaniment needs. The teacher must decide whether to keep, cut, or replace repertoire and how to use the remaining rehearsals.
1. Recommend a final two-piece programme and justify it against the demands of the assessment and the candidate’s constraints. Include timings and rehearsal priorities.
Read the worked answer
Keep two pieces, not three: 3:10 + 4:40 = 7:50, leaving only 10 seconds for setup against an 8-minute limit. Adding the fanfare would exceed the limit and increase fatigue, so the 'safety' argument fails. The stronger programme is to retain Trumpet Voluntary and shorten Blue Bossa to about 4:00 by reducing the solo to 8 bars and trimming the repeated final head. That preserves contrast (baroque-style fanfare vs Latin/jazz) and brings the total to about 7:10, leaving realistic setup time. Rehearsal priorities: use Thursday accompanist sessions for entries, tempo and the ending; use before-school practice for low-load high-register drills; record a full run in Week 7 to check fatigue at 6 minutes. Do not add repertoire that has not been rehearsed with the accompanist.
2. Explain how the braces adjustment changes the risk management for the high-register passage in Blue Bossa, and give two specific rehearsal adaptations.
Read the worked answer
Braces change embouchure stability and endurance, so the risk is not the notes themselves but failure late in the programme. Two adaptations: (1) Re-bar the high-register passage into shorter phrases with rests, and transpose a repeated high phrase down an octave only if it does not break the stylistic line. (2) Practise the last 90 seconds first in each session ('reverse practice'), then assemble, so the ending is not always played under fatigue. Also schedule the hardest piece first in lessons when fresh, and use a stamina log: date, minutes before tone quality drops, highest stable note. If fatigue occurs before 6 minutes in two consecutive run-throughs, cut the solo to 4 bars or lower the key. The decision should be evidence-based, not a one-off bad rehearsal.
3. The candidate argues that adding the fanfare reduces risk. Evaluate this reasoning.
Read the worked answer
The fanfare does not reduce risk; it adds a third piece to prepare, a third ending to secure and more total playing time. The assessment asks for two pieces as featured soloist, so a third item is not needed for compliance. Safety comes from a reliable 7-minute programme with known endurance and rehearsed transitions. A better risk control is a contingency: decide in advance which 8 bars of Blue Bossa to cut if the evening runs late, and rehearse that cut. Also check the 8-minute limit includes setup; a third piece would make the timing impossible. The candidate is confusing 'more items' with 'more evidence'. The teacher should redirect the time into a full recorded run-through and accompanist rehearsal.