Issues : Differences in fingering
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next »
|
b. 106-108
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
..
In the first halves of bar 106 and 108, FES contains a fingering written in pencil, generally very blurry (erased?), which poses significant problems not only in recognising the digits, but also even in stating whether they were written in a given place at all. In the places where the digits are distinct enough to state it, one can recognise Chopin's hand. In the main text, we give the digits we were able to decipher on the basis of the available sources to a satisfactory degree of probability. It is noteworthy that the only completely distinct digit, the 3rd finger on e1, the 4th semiquaver in bar 106, generally clearly defines already the entire fingering. The fingering in FEH indicates a different hand position, while the use of the cross-over of the 5th finger seems to be less typical of Chopin in this context. Fontana's fingering in EE is still different, although much closer to the one in FEH. The authenticity of both fingerings is dubious. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Differences in fingering , Annotations in FES , Annotations in FEH |
|||||||||||||||
|
b. 106-108
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
..
Like in the 1st half of bar 106 and 108, the fingering in FES, most probably Chopinesque, is very difficult to decipher. According to the General Editorial Principles, p. 17, in the main text we give the digits, complementing each other, written in both bars already in the first (bar 106). The differing fingering of FEH may be considered an authentic alternative. Fontana's fingering in EE is fully compliant with the entry in FES and essentially also with FED. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Differences in fingering , Annotations in FES , Annotations in FEH |
|||||||||||||||
|
b. 106-108
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Differences in fingering , 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. 113
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
..
The fingering added in EE by Fontana is adjusted to the probably erroneous version of the 6th semiquaver of the bar (although its application in the version adopted in the main text is naturally possible). This fact most probably proves that it is totally arbitrary. The fingering of both sources, compliant in the ascending part of the passage, suggests changing the hand position marked by the placement of the 1st finger, which was on the a1 note in the previous passage. However, the Chopinesque fingering added to FES in the 2nd half of the bar, where the 1st finger is also on a1, suggests that Chopin meant to preserve this position also in the discussed passage, filling the 1st half of the bar. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Differences in fingering , Annotations in FEH |
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next »