Fingering
|
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 6, Prelude in B minor
..
In the main text we include the R.H. fingering added in FEJ, controlled by Chopin. In this Prelude, as an exception, we give the fingering from the teaching copies without brackets, since it does not contain any other authentic fingering, which eliminates the need to differentiate between the teaching entries and the printed indications, which are "universal", so to speak. At the same time, we take into consideration the fact that due to the abundant number of those indications, brackets could have unnecessarily complicated the notation, obscuring the picture of the music. Therefore, we give the almost certainly inauthentic fingering of EE over notes, to differentiate it from the teaching fingering, placed under or – in special situations – before notes. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies |
|||||||||||||
|
b. 1-2
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 6, Prelude in B minor
..
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 c category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Differences in fingering , Annotations in FES , Annotations in FEJ |
|||||||||||||
|
b. 3-4
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 6, Prelude in B minor
..
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. 5
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 6, Prelude in B minor
..
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. 6-7
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 6, Prelude in B minor
..
In FEJ the mark referring to the e 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 |
1 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 
