What is the difference between rad and vaganova

Although some teachers do both versions of it. What I love about the RAD, is that it makes me feel so secure and throughout the same exercises I can show all my expressions and feelings through the music and steps. If we get new students from another RAD school, you know exactly which class they should be in.

On the other hand, hearing the same music over and over again can get tiring and repeating the same exercises class after class. When you only train for RAD exams, other ballet workshops and classes are challenging because there is so much to learn.

You are not used to having to pick up new exercises quickly. What I love about Vaganova is that I think they have more beautiful arms and movements during an adage or grand allegro. I prefer the combinations of the steps and positions that they do in the centre. Their mind is used more to remember steps and react to different music a very big advantage in my eyes. But it is hard to put facial expressions and feelings into the steps due to the fact that music and steps change each class or week.

I was trained in the Cecchetti Italian method as a child, which is based on a very well thought out progression of exercises to produce a fully integrated dancer with great ballon "jumpiness" , fast footwork and beautiful lyrical arm lines with a lot of work in effacee and croise lines. Since then, I have taken RAD professional level exams, qualified as a Cecchetti style teacher, taken Vaganova method classes, and did quite a bit of self study on the Vaganova method, because, as a newly qualified teacher, I wanted to know how the training differered from what I knew already.

All methods Bournonville, Cecchetti, RAD, Vaganova can and does produce high quality dancers, but it depends on two major things: the teacher and the student. Good teachers teach in an integrated way, training both technique, perseverance, beauty, grace, dyamic movemement, and the list goes on. Syllabi exist as benchmarks and training guides. Good dancers are created by pupils that absorb and apply the corrections, who have good physiques, who possess natural performance talent, who are musical not just rhythmical ,and who put in the hours and hours and hours.

Most professional dancers today have cross trained in Pilates and with teachers from the other dancing styles, and most professional dancers can adapt to any style of choreography, regardless of what foundational training they had. It is clearly seen that the woman who wrote this article has never taken a class with a good teacher of the Royal Academy of Dance.

Plus they do not know in the least the system. States means having to take ballet classes. That does not give you a real perspective and no knowledge on the differences from one system to another.

Throughout my 30 years of experience in ballet, having taken System Royal Academy of Dance, Cuban, Mexican and Vaganova system assumes that the Russian system Vaganova is wonderful and is the mother of all methodologies, but I thoroughly studied system and Royal Academy of Dance and everything depends on the teacher and the school where you are studying, is Vaganova system of teachers who spend their lives and injuring master students who have taken very first Royal dancers.

Understand that it is a matter of teachers and students. Let me just say this: I started my training with Russian teacher. I tried briefly the RAD courses Agree with the "Anonymous" person above: The Russian system "makes other forms of ballet look fairly ridiculous in comparison" Cannot stop laughing Like I'd ever care to get A1 or A2 certificate I will not waste my money and time to do that If you want to do that, fine with me Here is a link to Mr.

Baryshnikov interviewed about his teacher Alexander pushkin, and some information about The teacher of Yuri Soloviev, Boris Shavrov. He speaks about the Russian method of Ballet and how it differs from that of the ballet in the west.

I agree with him. I am currently training with one of the last very possibly the last living person to be trained by the great Agrapina Vagonova, and I fully understand what Mr.

Baryshnikov if saying about his teacher because I am receiving the same instruction or better for she was able to take the information about ballet from Vagonova of what they knew at the time, and from there build even farther on it and now it's my job to go even farther than my teacher is so continuing the cycle and improvement of the art field.

At my school, not everyone has the ideal physique for ballet, but what what I've gathered from them is that they don't care for the nice pointy feet or extension, they don't care who you are or what type of legs you have, you're going to use what you have to the highest degree, and you will learn principles that are oh so crucial to the stage. We are learning the level of performance that Soloviev had or better for my teacher was also close with Mr. Soloviev and his wife.

It is the purest of ballet. But I have to admit that it makes other forms of ballet look fairly ridiculous in comparison. I consider myself very lucky to have the information that I do about this field of work and many people helped me come to this school to receive it. Of course this is not easy either, in fact, many times you want to shoot yourself in the head form the frustration, or physical, mental or emotional pain that comes.

But in the end, the audience doesn't care how you feel. No one said this life was easy, so by all means don't be disappointed when you find out that it doesn't feel as enjoyable as they make it look on stage when they're smiling and panting through their teeth for air.

Do something easy, like be a doctor. And what I love about RAD is it accepts any body type and give a chance for both those who have no intentions of becoming a professional and those who wants to pursue a career as a professional ballet dancer to experience and enjoy the art of ballet.

Every ballet technique has its own pros and cons. Personally, I prefer RAD. From what I've read I can tell that you haven't done RAD long enough to appreciate it or to realize that it is actually difficult as you progress, our exams are very technical. There's a difference between looking perfectly turned out and being actually turned out.

That's what RAD taught me. During exams the examiner is not looking for how high your extensions are or how turned out you are. Turn outs can be cheated with the right kind of costume, but in our exams they really check if you are perfectly correct. They don't care if your legs are not above 90 degrees just as long as they can see that your hip placement is correct and that when you're doing a grand battements you're not using your upper body to bring that leg up but your abdominal strength.

I've finished my Advance 1 exams and I'm happy to say that I passed. It was difficult given my age 35 at that time and to think I was using the old syllabus.

In 2 years time I shall be taking the Advance 2 exam new syllabus. From what I've seen I'm gonna need to really work on it. Did you also know that if you get high distinction in advance 2 exam you can get the solo seal exam whuchbis even harder. Oh wow! This is so far the most biased article I've seen in regards to ballet. Balletohmanehk you're not very objective in in this article. May I ask how long did you do RAD? Because if you had stayed long enough to reach the level of Advance 1 or Advance 2 your opinions might probable change.

Vaganova does produce strong, flexible, highly athletic dancers but personally it gives off the feeling that extensions are more important than feeling the dance. It has become more acrobatic than artistic which is not the main goal of ballet. I highly agree with Narielle's post. Here's someone who is not at all biased. It gives me immense pleasure to see how much interest and heated debate this article has generated, even after years I have penned it.

My final point to make is that I never remember really learning the vocabulary of ballet as a young student, but with the Vaganova method I am teaching my students the correct terminology from the age of 6 and they are assessed on this in the theory part of their exams.

At the end of the day, this is just my humble opinion and am open to debate. But I hope this has helped explain the main differences that I see, coming from someone who has worked with both syllabi and styles.

I will use a more English Australian approach with our 3 — 6 year olds because I think little ones deserve the space to be creative and begin learning ballet.

But thats a discussion for another time…. This is why I chose to teach the Vaganova method as a ballet teacher. This is in not the right way to train dancers. The Vaganova system is built in a systematic way and the emphasis is on the correct usage of muscles through its specific requirements, such as the angle between the leg and the hip, and the strict requirement for turnout.

Through these demands, the muscles are properly strengthened and chances of injuries are actually reduced, contrary to popular misconception. Everybody knows that few people actually fail the RAD exams. Sure, there are occasionally a few students who stand out above the others due to their talent and physical attributes, but generally speaking, this kind of training lacks real substance, and in the long run, the majority of students will not be equipped to step on the highly competitive world stage.

This compares with the RAD training, which requires most steps to be done en face, which is not commonly used on stage around the world because it presents the dancer in a flat and uninteresting angle. Another main difference is that all exercises are done both en dehors and en dedans.

In other words, the direction of movements are done first in one direction and then repeated in the reverse direction.