mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Annotations in teaching copies

b. 1-2

composition: Op. 28 No. 6, Prelude in B minor

fingering written into FEJ

Fingering written into FES

No teaching fingering in A (→FE,FC→GE)

Fingering in EE

Our variant suggestion based on FEJ & FES
..

The fingering of the entire phrase comes from FEJ, and the only alternative entry in b. 1 – from FES. That fingering differentiation in those copies is most probably preserved also in identical b. 9. Anyway, it is very likely that the difference concerns only the d1 crotchet and the c1 quaver. We assume that both possibilities come from Chopin, even if they were not written by his hand. In turn, there are no grounds to consider the fingering of EE to be authentic, which we place over notes for the purpose of clarity.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Differences in fingering , Annotations in FES , Annotations in FEJ

b. 1

composition: Op. 28 No. 11, Prelude in B major

Fingering written into #FESz

No teaching fingering
..

In the main text we include the fingering digit entered probably by Chopin into FESch.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FESch

b. 1

composition: Op. 28 No. 23, Prelude in F major

No fingering in A (→FE,FC→GE)

Fingering in EE

Fingering written into FED

Our suggestion based on FED
..

In the main text we include the Chopinesque fingering entered into FED (we omit the 321 digits in the 1st half of b. 2, repeated after an identical figure in the 2nd half of b. 1). The same fingering, marked with a greater number of digits, was added in EE.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Annotations in FED

b. 1-5

composition: Op. 28 No. 15, Prelude in D♭ major

No teaching fingering

Our suggestion based on FES
..

We give the fingering digit over the 1st R.H. note in the main text on the basis of the Chopinesque entry in FES in analogous b. 76 (see General Editorial Principles, p. 17). The first of the digits written in the same copy over the a1 minim in b. 1 is not very legible, yet the respective entry in b. 5 dissipates any possible doubts.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FES

b. 1

composition: Op. 28 No. 14, Prelude in E♭ minor

Allegro in A (→FC→GE, →FE→EE)

Largo in FES
..

Largo written in FES instead of Allegro, which was crossed out, is most probably a teaching correction – it indicates the way the piece should be practised, and not a change of concept of the Prelude. Placing the Prelude in E Minor provided with Largo between the Preludes in F Major and D Major (Lento and Sostenuto, respectively) seems to be unlikely due to the structure of the entire cycle.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FES , Authentic post-publication changes and variants