Issues : Annotations in FEJ

b. 1-2

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

fingering written into FEJ

Fingering written into FES

No teaching fingering in A (→FE,FCGE)

Fingering in EE

Our variant suggestion based on FEJ & FES

..

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 cquaver. 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 EE to be authentic, which we place over notes for the purpose of clarity.

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

Fingering written into FEJ

Fingering written into FES

No fingering in A (→FE,FCGE)

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. 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. 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,FCGE)

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

b. 7-8

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

Fingering written into FEJ

No fingering in A (→FE,FCGE) & CGS

Fingering in EE

..

In the main text we include the fingering entered into FEJ. The different fingering of EE is almost certainly inauthentic.

category imprint: Differences between sources

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