Estimated from our difficulty score, not taken from an exam syllabus. Checked against 333 works on the ABRSM syllabus: the exact grade is right 7 times out of 10, and within one grade 99 times out of 100.
Difficulty estimate by MusicCoach on a scale of 1 to 100.
Most works cluster between 45 and 65: a small score gap often marks a real step. The highlighted bar shows this work among those for the same instrument.
The MusicCoach difficulty measures a work's overall demands (technique, reading, stamina) on a shared 0-100 scale, consolidated from editorial and pedagogical reference points (Henle, exam syllabuses, curation) and our own analyses. It measures neither musical value nor the practice time YOU will need: two musicians of the same level can experience the same work very differently depending on their strengths (hands used to octaves, quick sight-reading…). The confidence reflects how many reference points sit behind the score and how well they agree — a lightly documented score is flagged “to validate”. For a truly personal bearing, the diagnostic and your space compare each work to YOUR estimated level, which the score alone cannot do.
Does this rating look right to you?
This rating is computed automatically from heterogeneous sources. It gets things wrong, sometimes badly. If you know this work, your answer is worth more than our computation: it tells us which ratings to review.
Each suggestion combines difficulty gap, risk, confidence and skill overlap. The first two cards in each column are the most useful pedagogically.
The safest next step.
A genuine step up, without a jolt.
A useful leap with guided practice.
This movement from the Kyrie-Gloria, an early version of BWV 232, feels ceremonial and slightly veiled: long, interweaving phrases that require sustained poise rather than Romantic sweep, with contrapuntal layers that call for solemn clarity. Technically, you will be challenged by the “Polyphonie à trois voix ou plus (2.5/5)”, which here means clearly assigning the independent lines between the hands and preserving their independence (voicing, control of legato vs. detaché) so the imbrications remain audible, and by “Analyse harmonique (2.5/5)”, which requires anticipating chord progressions and modulations to shape dynamics and breathing without breaking continuity. This piece is related to Bach’s major Mass BWV 232 and is presented in an earlier form, so it should be seen in the context of his sacred vocal output rather than his solo keyboard works. I do not provide a reference recording because I am not 100% certain of a specific interpretation for this early version.