ARCT...

[ongaku_oniko]

For those of you who know what ARCT is, how advanced is ARCT coupled with harmony 5, history 3,4,5, counterpoint 4 and analysis 5?

Basically, the top levels of practical and theory in the RCME syllabus. Exactly how advanced is that for you professional musicians? Is that level sufficient to be called a "pro", or is that only a beginners level?

How long would it typically take from start of learning piano to passing the ARCTs for a person thinking of becoming a pro?

Would ARCT level playing be considered a requirement for undergraduate level musical study, or would you be at an ARCT level after completeing undergraduate study?

[thinkgreenlovepiano]

Well I'm not a professional musician. But I don't think that you magically become a "pro" after you finish your ARCT... grades are just grades... and well at least in my opinion, music isn't just all about grades and levels. (: Besides, ARCT repertoire spans a wide range of difficulty, some pieces are considered *a lot* easier than others.

I think that USUALLY, to go to university for pedagogy, you need a grade 9 certificate.
For piano performance, you need to complete your ARCT.
And also, after ARCT, if you still feel like sticking with RCM, there's still a licentiate exam

 

[ongaku_oniko]

Thanks for answering my question again!

What I mean is not that you suddenly because a pro after ARCT and aren't if you don't take it. What I mean is, let's take math for example. There are people doing masters, PhD, post doc and people doing research at the Advanced institute for mathematics and sciences at princeton.

Sure, PhD is a lot lower than people at the institute, but you can't say they aren't professionals.

Similarly, I'm trying to gauge at what level ARCT is. Is it something that all pianists should achive by the time they're 10, or is it something to be proud of even if that's all you achieved for life? I mean obviously it's different for each person, but for the average person with good talent and trying to go professional. Where would ARCT-level playing be in terms of their career goals?

[thinkgreenlovepiano]

No problem, I'm sorry I couldn't help more. I know what you mean by your question, I have wondered the same thing myself, but as I said, I'm unable and unqualified to answer. So I'm just going to bump this up for you...

Anyway, Like I said before, ARCT pieces cover a wide range of difficulty.
And I wasn't implying that you thought ARCT made you a pro, my point is just that it's hard to measure how advanced someone is just by using levels. Eg: having a PhD does not necessarily make the person better at math than someone with a masters.
 
And I definitely think ARCT is something to be proud of, no matter what stage you are.  Are you doing your ARCT right now?

Ok I'm done, hopefully someone will answer your question for real.

[ongaku_oniko]

Anyway, Like I said before, ARCT pieces cover a wide range of difficulty.
And I wasn't implying that you thought ARCT made you a pro, my point is just that it's hard to measure how advanced someone is just by using levels. Eg: having a PhD does not necessarily make the person better at math than someone with a masters.
 
And I definitely think ARCT is something to be proud of, no matter what stage you are.  Are you doing your ARCT right now?

I agree, that's why I said ARCT level playing, not just the designation :p

And I agree with your second statement too, which is why I said "obviously it's different for each person, but for the average person with good talent and trying to go pro, where would ARCT-level playing be in terms oftheir career goals".

I always try to be a lawyer and cover for all posibilities.

And nah, I don't have the drive and willpower to do ARCT

[ch101]

  I am going for ARCT right now. I read the list of repetoire a few times, and honestly I find that there are a lot more difficult stuff out there that are a real notch higher that even the hardest piece on that list. They limit the exam to an hour. For example, nowhere on that list did it mention Jardins sui la Pluie, or Islamey, or Tarantella, or any of those kind of challenges. Well, you can call yourself a pro, but you are not in the highest orders of piano performance yet.

[kelly_kelly]

  I am going for ARCT right now. I read the list of repetoire a few times, and honestly I find that there are a lot more difficult stuff out there that are a real notch higher that even the hardest piece on that list. They limit the exam to an hour. For example, nowhere on that list did it mention Jardins sui la Pluie, or Islamey, or Tarantella, or any of those kind of challenges. Well, you can call yourself a pro, but you are not in the highest orders of piano performance yet.

Jardins sui la Pluie is absolutely nowhere near something like Islamey in difficulty, and is well within the range of the repertoire on the ARCT list... and there are lots of tarantellas so that statement doesn't mean anything... but if you're playing the pieces in your signature of course you know this

But at any rate: the fact is that ARCT level playing is something worth aspiring to. It probably doesn't mean anything among mature professional performers, but I'm assuming that isn't a concern? On average, ARCT is probably something aspiring professionals have around the time they begin undergraduate training - so maybe the equivalent of a high school diploma?

[thinkgreenlovepiano]

  I am going for ARCT right now. I read the list of repetoire a few times, and honestly I find that there are a lot more difficult stuff out there that are a real notch higher that even the hardest piece on that list. They limit the exam to an hour. For example, nowhere on that list did it mention Jardins sui la Pluie, or Islamey, or Tarantella, or any of those kind of challenges. Well, you can call yourself a pro, but you are not in the highest orders of piano performance yet.

I am almost certain Jardins sous la pluie is in the ARCT syllabus...

[ch101]

I am almost certain Jardins sous la pluie is in the ARCT syllabus...

sorry...I did not check properly.
but why do I find it SO difficult? I mean, i am doing la campanella right now and it is easier. maybe it depends on your technique i just don't know

[thinkgreenlovepiano]

sorry...I did not check properly.
but why do I find it SO difficult? I mean, i am doing la campanella right now and it is easier. maybe it depends on your technique i just don't know

yeah, everyone is different And each piece has its own challenges, it depends on how you define "difficult" at times.
But as for those two pieces specifically, what do I know? I haven't played either

[raintree]

Is the format of the ARCT exam similar to that of the Grade 10 RCM exam?

How many pieces must one memorize for the ARCT exam?

Is there an ARCT performance route and a ARCT pedagogy route?

Thanks in advance!

[ongaku_oniko]

the format is completely different.

ARCT performers is like a real, 60 minute (or was it 65?) recital.

How many pieces I can't remember, and it's hard to just count how many pieces because a lot of "pieces" are actually many pieces

for example you can play any 2 of chopin's etudes. Is that one piece or two pieces? and a full sonata. Again, one piece or 3 pieces?

But you're supposed to pick something that adds up to about 60 minutes. There is no technical or ear training.

And there is no pedagogy, but there's ARCT perfomer and ARCT teacher.

*The above information is from 2005, and from heresay, and may not be trustworthy. Believe at your own peril*

[thinkgreenlovepiano]

Actually, I think there are 2 ARCT teachers diplomas.
One non-piano ARCT teachers (which you don't have to worry about, if you are doing piano), and one ARCT in piano pedagogy, where you have to take a bunch of piano pedagogy courses...
ARCT pedagogy looks like a lot more work than performers, because you have to take the pedagogy courses in addition to all that theory.
All the info is here: https://www.rcmexaminations.org/acadinfo/certificates.html

@ongaku, I thought you only had to play 1 etude for ARCT? Did they change that? :O I know my friend is only doing one (op 10 no 12).

Anyway I think you need one Bach, one full sonata, one romantic, one late/post romantic, and one 20th/21st century, and then one etude.

[ongaku_oniko]

As I said, my info is from 2005, when pedogogy thing was new

And furthermore, my memory could be wrong. So my info isn't very trustworthy, since I was nevergoing to take the ARCT, I didn't look into it that deep

[quantum]

For the 2008 Syllabus

Performers ARCT includes the following:

List A: Bach
List B: Sonata
List C: Romantic
List D: Post-Romantic and Early 20th century
List E: 20th and 21st century
Concert Etude


If you are choosing a Chopin Etude you only need one from Op 10 or 25, excluding 25/2. 

[gzawaski]

As a holder of an ARCT in piano performance and professional musician, I find this topic to be interesting.

Of course I have a slight bias, but I believe an ARCT is a great background.  To the original poster, I can relate to your questions because I once pondered them myself. 

Professional means being payed real money for ones playing, teaching, or writing music.  If one has an ARCT or is working towards one, they can be rest assured (good social skills will help) they are prepared to teach at least beginner to intermediate level students. 

An ARCT is quite advanced, though again, relative is the term to keep in mind.  Most concert pianists, ie ones with large repertoires of concertos and solo programs, would see the associate's diploma as a basic starting point. 

To the general public and the vast majority of musicians out there, an ARCT places one with an extremely high level of technical skills and musical training.   It really is a highly respectable degree of musical training one can be proud of throughout life. 

My advice is to think about what you want to achieve in music. I took 2 years after high school to work and complete my ARCT.  I did not pass my first try and  achieved it at age 20.  By then, I was quite confident in my classical piano abilities. 

It is my opinion that an ARCT, with the combination of a musical curiosity and imagination, gives one the foundation and ability to play anything they desire on the piano.

[amelialw]

An ARCT is definitely worth something! I too completed my ARCT performer's a few years back and really enjoyed the experience alot

The purpose of Rudiments,Harmony,History,Counterpoint& Analysis is to equip the students with the skills like analyzing the score, understanding the structure of the piece (why it was written in a certain way etc.) and many more points...

If you want to be a really good musician you certainly can't depend on achieving the ARCT diploma alone and many more years have to be spent studying each composer& digging even deeper in (somewhat like what my teacher has started for me).

The max. time limit is 60 mins and it does cover a very wide variety of rep. If you want to take up something more challenging the LRCM is something worth considering...I attempted it this june, did not make it because I prepped 3 months before hand (and started 1-2 pieces even a month-month+ beforehand) but I came really really close to passing it and enjoyed it so much that i'll be taking it again next june.