mUltimate Chopin

Op. 28 No. 6, Prelude in B minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description
Select: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Notation
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

b. 3-4

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

Fingering written into FEJ

Fingering written into FES

No fingering in A (→FE,FC→GE)

Fingering in EE

Fingering suggested by the editors, based on FES & FEJ
..

In the main text we give the fingering of FEJ, complemented at the beginning of b. 3 by the digits drawn from FES, compliant with it in the part where it is written. In FEJ one can see corrections of fingering – in b. 3, '4' was changed to '3' over the d2 semiquaver, while in b. 4 the last three notes were initially provided with the following digits: 1 2 3.We assume that the change was introduced or indicated by Chopin. The authenticity of the initial version, which is otherwise completely natural in terms of piano performance, is more problematic, and the authenticity of the indication of EE, which is compliant with it, is practically ruled out. 

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

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

b. 3-4

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

  in A, contextual interpretation

  in A (possible interpretation→FC)

  in FE (→EE)

  in GE

No markings in CGS
..

As was the case with b. 1-2, we consider the top arm of the  hairpin in A to be reliable. In all the remaining sources (except for CGS, in which the marks were overlooked), it was the range of the bottom arm that was taken into account. In the editions, both marks were extended or moved, most probably after their own, general editorial principles.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions , Inaccuracies in A

b. 5

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

Fingering written into FED

Fingering written into FEJ

Fingering written into FES

No teaching fingering
..

In the main text we give the fingering entered into FEJ, confirmed by a more sparing entry in FED. The addition in FES is also compliant with that fingering, although the d1-g1 notes can be performed by other fingers, e.g. 4-2. Actually, it was those digits that were initially written in FEJ in this place and changed to 2-1.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FED , Annotations in FES , Annotations in FEJ

b. 5

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

 in A (contextual interpretation) & GE

  in FC

  in FE

  in EE

No marking in CGS
..

Just like in the similar situations in b. 1 and 3, we believe that it is the top arm of the  mark in A that is more reliable. In FC Fontana averaged the length of the mark, which is one of possible solutions. We consider the mark in GE, slightly shorter than in FC, to be compliant with our interpretation of A. The mark of FE, stretched out, so that it covers an entire bar (and inaccurately reproduced in EE), is most probably a revision.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins , EE inaccuracies , FE revisions

b. 6-7

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

Fingering written into FEJ, probable reading

Fingering written into FES

No fingering in A (→FE,FC→GE)

Fingering in EE
..

In FEJ the mark referring to the e1 crotchet is illegible. According to us, it may be a fingering digit (2), written instead of a 'one' – it would then be the same notation that can clearly be seen in FES. The 1st finger on e1 in b. 6 visible in EE most probably also indicates that fingering.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

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