The 4 Elements of a Great Piano Critique

by Marcia Vahl, NCTM

Judging opportunities may take us into judging state piano exams, contests, Piano Guild, Federation Junior Festivals, or composition contests. No matter what the event, writing a great piano critique starts with considering who will read it.

Consider Your Audience

A great piano critique starts with considering who will be reading and trying to benefit from the critique. What does the student’s teacher want to see? When I send a student to an event, I want to know if the student seemed calm and confident, or whether they were very nervous. If something unusual happened on the day of the event, I want to know about it. Start with the word “today.” “Today, you played with a beautiful legato on the melodic ideas in the A theme, “ or “Today, you had some memory troubles in measures 16-20.” Whatever happened that day, it’s important for the judge to present a clear picture of exactly what happened.

Consider Their Investment

Both the parents and the student deserve to see comments meriting the price of registering for that activity. Think of all the preparation that precedes a student coming to the day of the event. Months of planning, practicing, and polishing, and then the student enters the room, plays their best despite last minute nerves, wondering how they will perform. The student struggles with some passages, and plays very well in others. A week later, the teacher receives the critique and hardly knows how to present the judge’s comments to the student. It says only, “Phrasing, dearie!” Would you have paid a registration fee of $15-20 for that feedback? How much better would it have been better to give some specifics of what happened that day, specific measure numbers that the student played well, or needs to improve, with simple suggestions on where to go from here, coupled with encouragement for the future?

Here are the four elements of a great piano critique:

1. A Great Piano Critique is Nurturing, Respectful, and Kind. It sets a positive tone by opening and closing with a positive comment on every critique. I like this statement: “Teachers, parents, and students look to the critique for indications that the student’s accomplishments are being measured against a reliable standard of excellence, but also for words that will motivate the student toward greater challenges and future progress. Let your words assure the student that they are capable of taking the manageable next steps that you suggest, and give them the spark of desire to courageously grow as musicians.” (MFB, “Writing A Great Critique).For example, instead of commenting “Be sure to prepare better next time,” consider this critique on “In Old Castile” by Briant & Zatman:
   

   What a sensitive musician you already are—you showed that wonderful combination of a strong, secure technique and a beautiful depth of artistry. Thanks for not falling apart at the finger knot/ memory slip in m.21 because the rest was too beautiful to miss. You might consider a little less sound in LH, more (or some) ritardando at m. 14. I personally would like a little more RH sound but I know there are no forte’s. Being as sensitive as you appear to be, you could do more with shaping phrases with the rise and fall of the melodic line—and we would sit on the edge of our chairs and ask you to play it again and again and again and again.”

2. A Great Piano Critique is Specific. A great critique is descriptive and specific, providing a clear picture of what happened at the event. It’s important for the judge to “listen with style in mind,” and by that I mean the historical contest of the piece. “Comments should demonstrate a thorough knowledge of the literature and performance practices of the style/era/genre of the repertoire performed. Balance comments about details with a general summary of overall performance vitality and expressiveness.” (MFB, “Writing A Great Critique”)Would you rather hear, “Nice performance today. Good pedaling, not so good dynamics,” or this great example, critiquing “Gooseberry Pie” by Valerie Roth Roubos:
   

   I enjoyed the hearty, robust tone you employed for this rollicking piece! What an exciting tempo you chose today! It was a bit faster than marked, but it worked well in m. 1-32. Check LH notes at m. 18-19—today we missed them. Try for a softer dynamic at m. 20-23. Most of the piece is loud, so the contrast would be very nice. The tempo slowed at m. 33, where the LH has melody. Either slow down the rest of the piece to match the tempo you can handle for this section, or work to bring this section up to speed. Wonderful ending! The soft last chord was just beautiful. Very secure memory and poised performance. Keep practicing to continue to develop the artist inside. See you next year!

3.  A Great Piano Critique is Fair, to the Performer and the Teacher. “Evaluate the performance that you hear—not the performer or the choice of repertoire. A good assessment will not assume anything about the student’s preparation or potential. Be open to musical interpretations and technique that may be different from your own. Is the performance convincing, vibrant, expressive on its own terms? Accept editorial markings indicated by the teacher and make comments based on how well the student executed the given plan.”You may have a different interpretation, different dynamic plan in mind or an idea in your own mind of what rubato should be, but I think the following critique of Manuel Ponce’s “Intermezzo” shows appreciation for the student’s rubato sense:
   

   You are a master at control of rubato and tone! I loved the sounds you created. You only need to be careful that all notes sound in the piano sections. You set the perfect mood for this fine piece, and I loved listening to the wonderfully voiced tenor line at m. 48-53. Do be careful in m. 47 to be sure to get the e minor chord accurately. Today, I think it was just a finger slip, but you proved your superior preparation by going right on.I was listening for voicing on the alto chromatic line in m.13, 24, 45, 52. I think you can add a little pressure here, and it would be even more effective. You have mastered the musical details in a mature way. Good for you!

4. A Great Piano Critique Is Valuable. The most brilliant and nurturing words are of no use to the student if the critique cannot be read easily. Make sure writing is legible. Make sure the critique is worthy of the cost the student paid to enter the event. Give them comments that provide the quantity and quality of feedback that is worth the price of their time and registration fee.This great piano critique of Beethoven’s Bagatelle in D Major, Opus 119 No. 3, uses specific terminology and clearly references specific measures, encouraging further development, instead of the far too generic “Nice work on dynamics and phrasing.”:
   

   Very good control of all touches. I would have liked some contrasts in volume on the repeats. I think the tempo could be even faster for an even more effective presentation, but I thought you handled the piece well at your chosen tempo. Do be careful at m. 29-31 so the chords are secure and in tempo. I loved your very well articulated LH 16ths at M 17. Great, strong and articulate passage work, focusing on clarity, strength, and evenness. I was listening for a sparkling sound on the first motive, and a crescendo going to the high D. I think you can bring out Beethoven’s wittiness even more in that first gesture if you can bump the tempo up a bit. Effective, light ending on m. 54-56. I liked that you felt the measures in one and enjoyed your trills at m. 23. Good Job!

Epictetus, the Greek Stoic philosopher offers this advice: “Nature gave us one tongue and two ears so we could hear twice as much as we speak.” When we judge a piano event, the participants are really “renting our ears,” and hope to receive content on the critique that will fairly evaluate their performance, with specific information that is nurturing and can lead them on to greater success and growth as a musician. Now it’s your turn: What else do you think should be on a great piano critique? 

* I’m quoting in this article from my friend, mentor, and teacher, Dr. Marianne Fleming Bryan, who teaches in her private studio in St. Paul, Minnesota. She, along with a team of members from our Judge Education Committee, undertook the overwhelming task several years ago of re-writing and systematizing a Handbook for Judges for Minnesota Music Teachers Association. She handed the job of Judge Education Chair down to me when she began to take on a bigger role in MTNA.

Marcia A. Vahl, NCTM, is owner and teacher at Maple Grove Piano in Maple Grove, Minnesota. Her background includes degrees in music education and piano performance, 30+ years teaching experience in the classroom and private lesson studio, and more than 20 years church music ministry. She is an active member of both MMTA, MTNA, and National Piano Guild. She has served MMTA as hospitality chairman for judges at the state contest, judge for theory, piano exams, and contest, and secretary for the Education Council. Most recently she served as State Contest Administrator for 2005-2006 and Vice President of Minnesota State Piano Contests from 2006-2010. She has given presentations on Motivation, Building A Website for Your Studio, and Judge Training at the Minnesota State Convention. Her current responsibility is Judge Education Chair for Minnesota Music Teachers Association.