mUltimate Chopin

Op. 28 No. 6, Prelude in B minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Annotations in FEJ

b. 16-18

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

Fingering written into FEJ

Fingering written into FES

No teaching fingering

Our variant suggestion based on FEJ & FES
..

In the ending of the phrase, starting from the last semiquaver in b. 16, FEJ and FES present completely different fingering versions. The only point in common, the 5th finger on D in b. 17, allows us to consider the fingering used before and after independently – e.g. the 1st finger can be used only just on A, as it is done in FES, but end with the 3rd finger on F, which was indicated in FEJ. In turn, the 3rd finger written in FEJ at the beginning of b. 18 does not combine with the second, with which the previous F note was marked in FES. In the FES itself, the minim G in bar 18 is not marked with fingering – the sign below it do not form a digit in our opinion – so both notes in b. 18 were possibly to be performed with the 1st finger, clearly separating the phrases, in accordance with the slurring. It cannot be ruled out that one of the lines written there underlines such a separation.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

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

b. 18-20

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

Fingering written into FEJ

Fingering written into FES

No teaching fingering

Our variant suggestion based on FEJ & FES
..

Similarly to analog. b. 15, the fingering versions of FEJ and FES differ in the performing manner of the e crotchet in b. 19. For the remaining notes (until c in b. 20), both copies indicated the same fingering, yet in a different way. Under the f quaver in b. 19, FES initially contained the digit '1', which was then transformed into a '2'. According to us, it was not a change of a finger, but a correction of a mistake.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

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

b. 20-21

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

Fingering written into FEJ

Fingering written into FES

No teaching fingering

Our variant suggestion based on FEJ & FES
..

As was the case with b. 16-17, FEJ and FES indicate the pass of the 1st finger in a different place. However, both copies are in agreement about the F minim, to which the 2nd finger is assigned in FEJ, and, implicitly (on the basis of b. 17), also in FES. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

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

b. 22-23

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

Fingering written into FEJ

Fingering written into FES

No teaching fingering

Our variant suggestion based on FEJ & FES
..

As in previous similar figures, in FES – differently than in FEJ – finger swaps were indicated on one key (the opposite situation is to be found only in b. 18).

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

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

b. 22-23

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

B1 tied in A (→FC→GE, →FE→EE) & CGS

H1 repeated in FES

Our variant suggestion
..

A mark annotated on FES is probably meant to cancel the tie to B1. The repetition of B1 is also possibly suggested by the fingering written into FEJ – the fifth finger in sequence under B1 in bar 22, and B1 and B in bar 23. The repeated B1 in bar 23 may be seen as advantageous in view of the rhythm of the basic motif and the original pedalling. Taking this into account we suggest a variant version in the main text – a tie in parantheses.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

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