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 Prelude and Fugue in E minor has a contemplative, contrapuntal character: the prelude sets suspended lines and a sense of restrained forward motion while the fugue requires clear voicing of independent strands within a dark, inward mood. Technically, the listed skill “Polyphony in three voices or more (4.4/5)” here means very independent finger work to separate musical layers, balance parts and bring out the subject without covering inner voices, and the listed “Legato (3.3/5)” calls for precise finger and wrist legato to connect contrapuntal phrases where fingers must overlap and hand weight must be managed to avoid breaking the line. The piece belongs to Glazunov’s Romantic-period piano output and shows his tendency to recast classical forms with late-Romantic harmonic language, forming part of his smaller-scale piano repertoire. I do not provide a reference recording because I am not certain of a single, widely recognized interpretation for this exact work.