![](/build/images/logo_left-en.png)
![](/build/images/pl-button.5cab5de0.png)
![](/build/images/pomoc-button.d3d09842.png)
![](/build/images/pomoc-button-en.5098433b.png)
Issues : Differences in fingering
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. 9-10
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 6, Prelude in B minor
..
It is difficult to decipher the fingering of FES. In b. 9 under the d1 crotchet, there are two digits, one above the other, while the bottom one, '1', seems to be crossed out. Therefore, one could assume that the 'one', written first, was crossed out and replaced with a 'two'. However, according to us, such an interpretation is wrong – had the 'one' been written first, it would have been placed higher, closer to the note. Consequently, the apparent crossing-out is most probably a curved line indicating the change of fingers, as was the case with b. 1. In b. 10 the 1st digit could be interpreted as a '4', which, however, would be completely unjustified – cf. the fingering in the same source in analog. b. 2. A more accurate analysis of the entry reveals that it is most probably an awkwardly written '3', which results in a full compliance both with the entry in FEJ and the fingering in b. 2. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions; Source & stylistic information issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Differences in fingering , Annotations in FES , Annotations in FEJ |
||||||||||||
b. 15
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 6, Prelude in B minor
..
In the main text we include the fingering of FES and FEJ, differing only in the way the 1st note of the phrase is attacked. Admittedly, FES marked the fingering only for the 1st note of the bar, yet the compliance of both versions of the fingering further on results from the entries in FES in analog. b. 19-20. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Differences in fingering , Annotations in FES , Annotations in FEJ |
||||||||||||
b. 16-18
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 6, Prelude in B minor
..
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 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
..
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 category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Differences in fingering , Annotations in FES , Annotations in FEJ |