to think young children who are grade 8 in piano

[SnarfEggbert]

cannot really understand all that they are playing?

My dc is 6 and is taking his grade 2 (no stealth boast this is not a remarkable achievement), the step up from grade 1 to 2 is huge, so therefore to grade 8 must be extreme.

My dc is having to learn about dotted quavers being worth 0.75 of a crotchet and semi-quaver being worth 0.25 of a crotchet. And add semi-quaver's to minims and all sorts of fractional equations. And how 6/8 work etc. Now my dc can play the music, but is slower at the maths (and in class is classed as being advanced at maths) element of the music.

So these children who go through music rapidly at a young age, are they just taught the music without knowing really what they are playing? Or are they all maths prodigies as well?

And do they have theory of music as well, and the scales or just the music pieces?

[throckenholt]

I think you can make it mathematical - the basis of the scale is mathematical - but to actually read it and play it you don't need to. You just need to know x symbol is this long, y symbol is that long, and 2 x's is the same length as y (extended to match all the symbols). There aren't that many and it isn't too difficult to pick up. It isno harder than learning which line or gap corresponds to which note.

[cory]

I was very far from a musical prodigy, but I certainly learnt the value of notes long before I knew about fractions in maths and so did everybody else in my family (middle class family where basic piano playing and singing to the piano was part of childhood). If you have a sense of rhythm you just hear it.

I also think imagination can do for life experience in many ways. After all, even great writers and composers haven't lived all the emotions they portray; they use whatever experience they have to imagine something different. Some people are very good at that even at a young age. And I don't think one should underestimate the level of emotional life that a sensitive and intelligent child is capable of.

[IvorHughJackolantern]

I have a great ear, if I hear a piece of music I can re-produce it note for note most of the time. What I can't do is read music very well at all. You have to go in 'blind' in your grades and obviously the pieces get harder and harder so by the time I was looking into grade 5, and seeing the sorts of pieces I'd be given, I knew it was time to bow out. Hence why I stopped with the exams and just settled for bashing about on it at home

[lljkk]

I would have thought it's about having a terrific ear & sense of rhythm which makes understanding the note differences quite intuitive, that's why young children can sometimes do it. I am terrible at rhythm & pitch, but am very good at math.

[IvorHughJackolantern]

I can play piano up to grade 4. I have dyscalculia though so that was as far as I could get, I couldn't cope with the theoretical side of it at all.

[FolkGhoul]

Well I'm 'musical'. I play several instruments and read music as easily/meaningfully as the written word.

I obviously know the mathematics of it, but I can't say I've ever thought about it. I don't really get how you would. I just read it and play it. Once you understand the note values I don't really understand what there is to think about.

Surely any mathematical element is very basic. I mean it's not going to help you solve quadratic equations is it!

[GhostofMammaTJ]

My DD1 struggled with maths. She started learning to play the flute and every single year her maths improved. She played beautifully and I was upset when she gave up.

Here is one of many possible links to show the evidence.

[SomersetONeil]

Not really required, that is.

[SomersetONeil]

Music is hugely and intrinsically mathematical - especially when studying musical theory and entire scores of music, but it's also greater than the sum of its parts and mathematic skills aren't necessarily required if you're inately musical. And of course, they're really required if you play from ear, and can't read music.

[dysfunctionalme]

Yes I think young children can "know" what they are playing, absolutely, even if the adults around them cannot appreciate it. Some kids are just startlingly brilliant.

[OhYouBadBadKitten]

X-post

[OhYouBadBadKitten]

It does depend on which board you do your exams with as to whether you need grade 5 theory to advance.

[Musomathsci]

It's only the Associated Board who insist on grade 5 theory before you can take any higher grade practical exams, so some children are probably taking grade 8 with other boards eg Trinity Guildhall, and bypassing the theory exams for now. However, if a child is sufficiently interested, there is no reason why they can't tackle theory at a young age. Some of the repertoire offered for grade 8 is clearly beyond the emotional capabilities of some youngsters, but there are plenty of alternative pieces so that a teacher can select suitable material for their age group. Personally I would ask what is the rush to obtain grade 8 - it's just a piece of paper after all, and doesn't prove anything more than that on a certain occasion the child was able to give an adequate performance of a set of scales, three pieces and a few aural and sight-reading tests. They may actually pass the exam despite failing the sight-reading section entirely.

[quirrelquarrel]

I'm nowhere near gifted in music, and I passed my Grade 5 by one mark with a VERY shaky grasp of all the components (funnily enough got full marks on something I always got nothing on in practise tests....)....went on to get Grades 6 and 7. You don't need to know much theory at all to pass in those.
I don't know if Grade 8 is so much higher up, I started learning a piece and tackling the scales and it was hard, but I'd expect any piece to be challenging at first- you need to get the feel and sense of it and there's a time when it all falls into place. Then you build on the scales you've learnt, and as long as you do well on the other sections you can pretty much bomb on aural (as I routinely do). Grades seriously mean veeery very little. I just play through my huge yellow Beatles anthology (the one you see everywhere, with chords and simple melodies, so you can play around a bit with your 'interpretation'). I don't play much more than that.

I'm certainly not saying that 10 year old Grade 8ers aren't extremely bright, but you really can just learn just what you need and no more. There are no tricks in the lesson. You do not get a holistic musical education with grades (ABRSM/TG at least, IMHO) as structure.

[KenDoddsDadsDog]

The language thing is interesting. I'm terrible at maths but fluent in two other languages.

[socharlotte]

the link between being good at music and maths is well documented.

[FamiliesShareGerms]

I sort of agree with the OP, in that young children have rarely had the life experiences (eg to have loved and lost) to be able to portray some of the intense emotions that makes, IMHO, wonderful music.

But on the other hand, a vey small number of truly amazing performers have "it" from a very very early age and intuitively understand what they are doing

[gerardbutlersthighs]

You'll also find a significant portion of linguists are musicians too

[CogitoErgoSometimes]

I don't understand what you mean about 'knowing what they are playing' tbh. Music is a skill and once you've deciphered the dots and squiggles well enough to match fingers with notes it's quite possible to be competent and proficient. Interpretation, as with any art, comes with experience.... but that can't be measured.

[MummytoKatie]

I did maths at Cambridge and I'd say about 50% of our year were grade 8 in at least one instrument so there is some kind of connection.

My own experience is that I can bearly play hot cross buns on the recorder but when my friend was telling me about their flute theory and how hard it was I immediately "got" it.

[noteventhebestdrummer]

DS4 passed Gd 5 Theory aged 7 - I knew he knew the necessary facts to pass, I was amazed that he actually wrote neatly enough in the exam for anyone to read his answers!

[squeakytoy]

I started learning piano at the age of 4 and my teacher was very strict on theory. It did help my maths a great deal, well, fractions anyway!

[gerardbutlersthighs]

I took grade 8 in year 9 and also got grade 8 theory at the same time I took my GCSEs. I was taught the theory alongside my practical, I was lucky to be taught by an exceptional pianist though who knew the merits of working hard so I was 'set' an evening routine of 45 mins practice and 15mins theory. Alongside this I was also in the local church choir and so really had music thumped into me from a young age.

I firmly believe being a musician helped me at maths and science, but even with all this practice and theory I am also, I'm afraid, very much an intuitive musician and can sight read any score you put in front of me,

[WelshMaenad]

I took grade 5 theory aged 10 and grade 8 (classical guitar) by about 11/12. I was, and remain, mediocre at maths. When it was music, I just 'got' it. The equivalent fractions in a classroom? Fergeddit.

[noteventhebestdrummer]

Some of my best young pupils are very instinctively musical and have very little intellectual understanding of notation. They catch up with the theory side at some point usually! It helps that I teach in in a fast pacy way, not with dry workbooks.