![](/build/images/logo_left-en.png)
![](/build/images/pl-button.5cab5de0.png)
![](/build/images/pomoc-button.d3d09842.png)
![](/build/images/pomoc-button-en.5098433b.png)
Issues : Annotations in FES
b. 110
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
..
Like in the R.H., the fingering digits written in FES pose problems in their interpretation, particularly those concerning e2 (1?) as well as b1 and d2 on the 3rd beat of the bar (4?, 1?). Generally, the fingering of FEH is totally compliant with the indications of FES – possible differences may occur only on the last two semiquavers on the 3rd beat of the bar, for which the interpretation of the entries in FES is questionable. In this situation, in the main text we give fingerings stemming from both copies, creating a coherent whole. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FES , Annotations in FEH |
||||||||||||||
b. 111-113
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
..
It is difficult to evaluate the authenticity of the fingering of FEH in bars 111 and 113 – the digits are very similar to the Chopinesque ones, but the fingering differs from the one written by Chopin (in pencil, under Miss Stirling's entry written in ink) in FES. From the pianistic point of view, both fingerings are natural and convenient – in the fingering of FES, the next note, b1, is most probably to be performed with the 5th finger; it may be easier for a smaller hand. The digits added by Fontana in EE define the same fingering that was written in FEH. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Differences in fingering , Annotations in FES , Annotations in FEH |
||||||||||||||
b. 111
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||||||||
b. 112
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
..
Except for a2 at the end of the 2nd triplet, the passages in bars 111-113 are built exclusively from the chordal sounds. It suggests a possible mistake of FE (→EE,GE1→GE2), confirmed by a correction in FES. A change of a2 to g category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Errors in FE , GE revisions , Annotations in FES |
||||||||||||||
b. 112
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
..
The fingering of FES and much more detailed indications in FEH overlap and complement themselves, so that they most probably indicate the same fingering. In the main text, we give the more sparing indications of FES. In the fingering of FEH, it is the difference with respect to the analogous passage in bar 111 that draws our attention – a different fingering of the 2nd semiquaver in the passage is adjusted to a different articulation of the 1st note, staccato in bar 111, legato in bar 112. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Annotations in FES , Annotations in FEH |