Selected and Reviewed by Andrew Eales
Find out more: About Pianodao Reviews
In the rapidly changing landscape of graded piano exams, the regular appearance of new syllabus and varied repertoire publications has remained a positive constant, so when LCME’s 2021-24 piano specifications expired, it was a surprise that they were extended pending a replacement.
This appears to be because the board has undergone considerable change during and since the pandemic. With new leadership and systems now in place, LCME are firmly back, and have this week published the long awaited new piano syllabus, wisely billed as being “valid for examinations from 2026 until further notice”.
Although the new syllabus is immediately valid from 1st September 2026, the previous 2021 syllabus will also remain valid until 31st July 2027 (but mixing the two is not allowed).
In this extended review, I will consider the new repertoire selections and ‘Piano Handbook’ publications, offer insight into other significant syllabus changes and options, and reflect on LCME’s continuing place within the piano exam market.
So to answer the big question many will have, has the wait for the new LCME piano syllabus been worth it? Let’s find out…
LCM Examinations
London College of Music Examinations (LCME hereafter) are well known as a progressive, friendly exam board, offering a wide selection of accredited, graded music assessments and professional diplomas. They describe their mission as:
”To empower individuals to unlock their full creative, academic and career potential through the transformative power of performance…”
Founded as far back as 1887, the board arrived on the scene two years before ABRSM, and ten years after the first board, which was Trinity College London. Uniquely, having become part of the University of West London, LCME are now the first and only exam board whose qualifications are awarded by a University.
With exam centres and representatives in over 45 countries across Europe, North and South America, the Middle East, Africa, Asia, and Australasia, LCME have a positive reputation for retaining their traditional qualities, while being widely praised for fielding examiners who are warm and approachable, so ensuring candidates are put at ease and able to perform to their full potential.
Meanwhile, here in the UK, LCME are regulated by Ofqual, who recognise them as equals alongside ABRSM, Trinity and others, and their Grade 6-8 exams carry the same UCAS value.
The board prides itself on leading the way in developing exam options that are relevant to today’s global world. Introducing their 2026 piano syllabus, they claim
“Whether you’re a teacher planning lessons, a candidate preparing for your next grade, or a parent supporting your child’s musical journey, this syllabus is built to help pianists develop well-rounded skills and a genuine love of music”
Syllabus overview and changes
LCME have long offered a number of alternative exams to suit different players, but with the 2026 they are rationalising these to a clearer set of options, which they outline in the new syllabus handbooks as follows:
“Piano examinations are available in two formats: graded exams and recital grades, both offered in person or digitally.”
Graded Exams remain largely as before, while the Recital Grades replace the previous Leisure Play option. The digital option is submitted as a recording of the corresponding elements; details of how this works will be available from the LCME website.
The “Pre-Preparatory” exam has been withdrawn, leaving ten levels: Step 1, Step 2, and Grades 1-8.
STEPS 1 and 2
The format of the Step 1 and Step 2 assessments is as follows:
- Scales and Exercises (25%)
- Two pieces from List A (20%)
- Two pieces from List B (40%)
- Questions (15%)
Step 1 includes only five-note pentascales, while by Step 2 they extend to one octave. At both levels, they are to be played hands separately and together from memory. The studies have been newly written by Victoria Proudler, as are most of the pieces.
GRADED EXAMS
Many aspects of these are unchanged, including the exam format, marking scheme and assessment criteria. In terms of the supporting tests, the discussion, sight reading, and aural components are also as before.
However, LCME have updated their scales requirements and added Keyboard Harmony as an alternative to sight reading. I will turn to these shortly, but here is the breakdown of the Graded Exam format and allocated marking:
- Technical work): a choice of either scales/arpeggios or studies (15%)
- Performance : three pieces (20% each)
- Discussion: the candidate and examiner engage in conversation about the music performed, including notation elements, instrument specific knowledge and techniques applied in the performance, appropriate to each grade (7%)
- Sight reading OR Keyboard Harmony (10%)
- Aural Tests (8%)
RECITAL EXAMS
As mentioned, these replace the Leisure Play exams from Grade 1-8, and consolidate LCME’s overall offer. They comprise the following:
- Performance: four pieces (22% each)
- Choice: either a fifth piece, or one supporting test (12%)
REPERTOIRE OPTIONS
The LCME Piano Handbooks group pieces into three lists, A, B, and C. They also publish legacy anthologies for each grade, and the back cover of each Piano Handbook lists further alternative pieces that are accepted.
New from 2026, LCME are adding a brand new Popular Piano graded repertoire list which they say is “packed with familiar favourites across genres and styles”. They include popular pieces from educational collections, arrangements of pop songs, jazz standards, and soundtrack music. There are plenty of classics too, such as Mozart’s Rondo alla Turca and Debussy’s Clair de lune at Grade 8.
Those taking the Graded Exams are allowed to pick up to two pieces from the Popular Piano list, while those taking Recital Grades can select as many as they like.
In terms of levels, LCME have chosen music which (while benchmarking is a notoriously inexact science) seems to offer clear parity with other boards across all grades, with nothing that seems particularly amiss.
KEYBOARD HARMONY
The inclusion of Keyboard Harmony as an alternative to sight reading represents the most radical and interesting change. The candidate is give one minute to look through and try out the tests, which across the eight grades as follows:
- Grades 1-3: candidate plays a harmonic accompaniment to a melody played by the examiner, using block triads in the RH and bass notes in the LH.
- Grades 4-5: candidate plays a previously unseen melody in the RH with harmonic accompaniment (block triads) in the LH, over a bass line played by the examiner.
- Grades 6-7: candidate plays a full accompaniment to a melody played by the examiner, following simple stylistic suggestions (vamping).
- Grade 8: candidate plays solo, harmonising a given melody incorporating RH inversions over a bass line in the LH.
From Grades 1-7 the expected chords are shown with standard pop/jazz notation above the treble stave, as well as roman numerals under the bass stave. However, at Grade 8 only the opening tonic chord is given, with all other harmonic choices made by the candidate. The harmony used must be diatonic and aligned to the key of the melody.
Keyboard harmony was once a standard option in the piano grade exams of the major boards, and having disappeared in recent years it’s refreshing to see the reappearance of this useful skill in the new LCME syllabus. In addition to the sample test digital booklet, free from their website, they are planning to launch further support and training materials later in the summer.
SCALES UPDATE
LCME’s revised scale requirements aim to to reduce preparation burden by offering a logical reduction of the number of items assessed at each level, but don’t try to reinvent the piano pedagogy wheel in the misguided way that ABRSM attempted in 2021.
There are a few anomalies (such as the delay of F major until Grade 2, which I feel is problematic in terms of joined-up learning), but I’m pleased to see the inclusion of broken chords all the way up to Grade 5: there’s wide recognition among top pianists and teachers that these offer far better value and repertoire relevance than arpeggios.
As a whole, LCME’s reduced scales syllabus continues to provide a valid and helpful framework for the cumulative acquisitions of technique and musical understanding. Indeed, the solid pedagogy on display here represents a rather stark rebuke to the learning issues caused by ABRSM’s alternative.
OTHER SUPPORT TESTS
LCME have not changed their other support tests for the 2026 syllabus, but for those unfamiliar with them, here’s a summary.
Candidates have the choice of playing a study (two at Grade 6 and above) instead of the scales requirements. These appear in the Piano Handbooks and are fairly traditional in tone, with elementary and intermediate studies by Le Couppey and Heller progressing through to études by Louise Ferrenc, Hélène de Moutgeroult, and William Sterndale Bennett in the higher grades.
The Discussion element is an interesting and distinctive part of the LCME assessment. Even in the Steps exams, the candidate is expected to identify pitch names from the score, and by Grade 1 the discussion encompasses all aspects of the notation used, as well as discussing the candidate’s personal response to the music.
At Grade 5, the candidate is expected to identify intervals, chords and modulations, and at Grade 8 can be asked about the musicians who have influenced their development, and the overall oeuvre of the composers whose works they play. As Grades progress, there is also a reflective aspect to the discussion, covering practice strategies and how to improve a performance, encouraging self-evaluation.
I think this all delivers an entirely valid alternative to a written theory exam requirement, and in the age of apps, online, and rote learning, assessing appropriate musical understanding at every level is perhaps more relevant and important than ever when it comes to accurate benchmarking of progress.
The LCME Sight Reading requirements are comparable to those of other exam boards, but the Aural Tests require special mention. These are clearly and cleverly designed to help the player develop strong links between sound and symbol.
In earlier grades there are two tests, one based on rhythm (e.g. tapping a pulse, identifying the time signature, clapping back rhythms, conducting in time with the music), and the other on pitch (identifying intervals, singing back a melody, identifying simple cadences).
It is disappointing to see singing required in the exam room, however briefly, but mercifully this disappears after Grade 3. At higher grades, the tests are progressively linked to discussion of a short piece played by the examiner, building on the skills previously demonstrated.
As always, I would advise consulting the LCME website for a fuller explanation, syllabus specification, regulations, and details about how to enter.
Repertoire selections
This brings us to the most important element of any piano syllabus: the music itself. And this is a key distinctive between syllabus offerings from the various boards.
With ABRSM producing hugely popular and varied selections in recent years, Trinity rather seeming to abandon core classical repertoire and pedagogy, and MTB giving a completely free choice to candidates, where does LCME fit in?
LCME explain their rationale for offering repertoire selections in three lists thus:
List A: voices and conversations
Focus: technique and precision
Typical characteristics: rhythmically precise, scalic, contrapuntal, clear articulation
At higher grades: rapid passagework, ornamentation
List B: poetry and drama
Focus: expressivity and musicality
Typical characteristics: shaping musical lines, dynamic and tonal awareness, narrative and imagery
At higher grades: rubato, pedal use, tonal colour
List C: games and dances
Focus: rhythm and flair
Typical characteristics: dances, syncopation, swung rhythms, stylistic variety
At higher grades: rhythmic complexity, diverse styles
This is hardly different to the ABRSM rationale, and having primarily used that board over the years I was struck by a sense of easy familiarity as I leafed through LCME’s Piano Handbooks. Indeed, a sizeable proportion of the music here has previously been featured by other boards.
And I say that as a compliment, because how ever hard the exam boards pursue novelty, I believe it’s important for musicians to have a significant and recognised baseline of core repertoire, a prism through which we understand the development of musical style, interpretation, and appreciate the key pioneering voices of the keyboard literature.
Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Schumann, Burgmüller, Kabalevsky, and Bartók all appear more than once within these Piano Handbooks, as do the more recent champions William Gillock and Chris Norton. Reassuringly too, Purcell, Handel, Haydn, Clementi, Schubert, Mendelssohn, Albéniz, Prokofiev, Ireland, and many more are happily and rightly represented.
This isn’t to say that the syllabus has a narrow classical or over-traditional emphasis. Far from it. LCME have included a wonderful range of music from composers old and new, women and men from around the world, writing in a multiplicity of musical styles.
Leading composers of the contemporary educational repertoire are particularly well covered, with pieces by Glenda Austin, Angeline Bell, Mona Rejino, and Dennis Alexander likely to prove especially popular and accessible as lighter choices. But LCME still find the room to include stalwart pedagogy favourites such as Gurlitt’s Night Journey and Alan Gritton’s Creepy Crawley.
Alongside these familiar hits, there are plenty of new discoveries too. My favourites include Florence Price’s A Morning Sunbeam (Grade 1), Madrigal by Mel Bonis (Grade 2), Anna Robinson’s Unleashed (Grade 3), and Emily Pedersen’s Now Think (Grade 6).
And how wonderful to discover Le peu de temps qu’il nous reste (“the little time we have left”) by Cambodian-raised, Western-educated composer Bosba Panh, which deftly channels the language of Debussy’s later style within a thoughtful, evocative, and fresh composition. I hope we’ll hear more from this gifted composer.
In case you are wondering how so much astonishing solo piano music can be brought together in these slim collections, it is in part because they aren’t filled with lacklustre arrangements of pop songs and movie themes. But for those seeking more commercial fare, the Alternative Lists for each grade point players towards various popular publications on the market.
I appreciate the careful thought given to this. LCME allow considerable freedom for players to explore the music of their own choice, while the Piano Handbooks set students on a pathway to discovering the greatest composers and works of the repertoire, alongside rediscovered treasures, and fresh music from around the world.
The Piano Handbooks
In previous years, I must admit that I’ve found the initial appearance of LCME’s ‘Piano Handbooks’ fairly uninviting, but the 2026 publications are immediately more impressive, and notably close the gap between their offerings and those of their publishing competitors.
While in previous years, LCME have included the scales for each grade within the book, this time they have chosen to make them available as a free digital book, with similar downloads offering examples of the sight reading, keyboard harmony, and aural tests.
Following the trend set by ABRSM and RSL Awards, the covers include images of young players from diverse backgrounds. I’ve heard some teachers strongly disapprove of boards doing this, particularly as so many learners are adults. Nevertheless, LCME have conjured effective modern images and cover design, even though I am a little disappointed by the underrepresentation of male learners.
While the publications commendably bear a ‘Carbon Balanced Print’ badge, I have to confess that I found their soft white paper, occasional print through, and choice of ink a little more difficult to read than the cream paper other boards increasingly use, despite the scores benefitting from a generously sized music font. Some neurodiverse players might struggle.
A consistent team are credited for the Grade 1 to 8 books. Naomi Yandell has done a superb job as editor, although I am surprised that she hasn’t included any information about sources. LCME’s recent publications have leant towards an austere urtext approach, but Yandell has gone for balance, including editorial dynamics (etc) in parenthesis throughout the grades. I prefer this to the more prescriptive approach taken by other boards.
Yandell is also responsible for providing helpful piano fingerings throughout the eight grades. The engraving and layout is by John Rogers, cover artwork by Zhanjiang Liu, and performance notes written by Anne Inglis and Ateş Orga.
It’s very good to see these included within each Handbook, rather than being sold separately as remains the case with ABRSM. Inglis and Orga follow a reliable format of delivering an engaging paragraph introducing the music and its background, followed by practical suggestions to support effective learning and stylish performance. They are accessible, engaging, and superbly written.
Meanwhile, for the Step 1 and 2 books, the aforementioned team is replaced. For these, respected educational composer and examiner Victoria Proudler provides exclusive original exercises in both books, while the overall editor is cryptically credited simply as KM.
The presentation of the Step 1 and Step 2 books is quite dry when compared with publications from other boards aimed at the younger age-group. However, the pedagogic elements are superb, and very well designed, again improving on the previous LCME offering for pre-Grade 1 players.
Closing thoughts
While exploring this syllabus, I have kept returning to the question of where LCME fit into the broader piano exam market at this point.
Like many, I have tended to think of them as a third, perhaps slightly easier option. But with this new syllabus, LCME are clearly consolidating their position as a board that listens carefully to the concerns and interests of teachers, and who are genuinely committed to educational aspiration and excellence.
At a time when some boards continue to pursue populism and grade deflation, LCME seem more keen to maintain the credibility and preserve the gold standards of yesteryear. In a way, it seems odd that this piano syllabus resembles the pedagogically informed, classical piano syllabus that I grew up with far more closely than the offerings of any of the other boards.
But this isn’t to ignore that LCME have also brilliantly captured a contemporary appeal and resonance, while adopting a practical flexibility apt for the digital age. Their repertoire selection is imaginative, diverse, and educationally rewarding, while their well-crafted supporting tests have a solid rationale which adds genuine value to the quality of assessment.
Meanwhile, their Piano Handbooks are a noticeable step improvement on their previous publications. And while I can’t yet comment on other aspects of the LCME operation, I am now curious to find out. This may well be a syllabus I find myself using a lot.
LCME deserve a very hearty round of applause: I’ll not hesitate to declare this one of the most educationally rewarding and musically inspiring piano syllabuses I’ve seen, which is high praise indeed.
Pianodao Music Club members receive 15% discount from Sheet Music Plus.
Musicroom has now joined Sheet Music Plus.
Retail links are currently being updated. Thank you for your patience.
Pianodao offers over 700 articles and reviews that are FREE to access.
If you appreciate this content, please support and follow the site here:
