“Level of Difficulty” is a poor analog for quality of repertoire.
We use it too often though. “We’re singing really tough rep” is something I hear students – and conductors – say with pride. It’s used as a tool for judging other ensembles, and in some situations the difficulty of the repertoire is the primary way of defining developmentally appropriate repertoire.
How else can we evaluate repertoire besides level of difficulty?
- Quality of text
- Beauty of melody
- Opportunities to teach (plenty of opportunities to teach in “not difficult” repertoire…)
- Continuity with other repertoire
- Time till performance
Don’t let our culture’s obsession with “level of difficulty” guide your repertoire choices. While it’s certainly true that Olympic divers’ dives should be assessed including their level of difficulty (so a three-somersault pike shouldn’t be judged evenly with a forward dive), there is no reason we need to carry those ideas to musical choices.
Make the right choice for the ensemble, using whatever factors you deem important.