I did the Australian system (AMEB) all the way through for piano – perhaps a bit more advanced per level compared with ABRSM with much more theory ( you have to do more theory exams than ABRSM and more advanced stuff) and general knowledge requirements as you go through. Harp had some major issues with AMEB (far, far too difficult – people were going to conservatories with grade 4 whilst every other instrument could achieve a grade per year easily and had diplomas whilst at school). I was a child of the Suzuki system for harp anyway. AMEB has recently revised their harp rep and tech requirements. What did it give me – the necessity of choosing and presenting essentially a recital each time. 4-5 pieces from lists ensuring different styles and eras (almost all “major” composers). Plus technical stuff, sight-reading, aural tests, a viva on the rep. I think it helped me prepare to perform to a deadline, made me go out and test my rep in performances and competitions before exams, made me look at all the choices carefully so I broadened my exposure to many composers, made me learn things I might not have chosen otherwise. It certainly meant that when I left school my general knowledge about classical music and theory was beyond that required for the first year conservatorium classes. I would say now that the Licentiate recital requirements exceeded those required for third year conservatorium performance exams. And were similar to those required for an advanced performance degree. Yes, I think those experiences all help me to perform better today on both instruments and help me to structure my teaching even if q pupil is not doing any
formal exams.