Re: Standardizing Skill Levels

[Mudharp@xxxxxxx]

So what I get from this thread is that the harmonica seems to not have 
established the formal skill levels that many other instruments, such as the 
clarinet, have. I guess the reason for such established skill levels is so that 
progress towards mastery can be gauged. Gauged by whom? One's self, one's 
teacher/professor, class, recital judges, colleagues (i.e., competition) and so forth. 
Well I think that when it comes down to it, it's the audience who matters 
most. For serious listening audience members who go by their senses and emotions 
when they "judge" musicality, I doubt if formal skill levels matter much. 
Here's what counts for me as an audience member when I listen to music of any kind. 
I need to sense (not necessarily in this order), 1. soul and feeling 
(subjective), 2. the player's ability to sincerely communicate creative, thematic 
musical ideas (in a word, phrasing), 3. technical prowess (agility, articulation, 
a good range of color and tonality, etc.). And finally, is the audience moved, 
stimulated, fascinated, intrigued, compelled to listen further? If it's a 
savvy audience and you've achieved any of those criteria then you have reached a 
skill level to be pleased with. Something to strive for.

T. Albanese