Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner fingering chopin etude op10 no4

Hi all,

I'm currently assigned this etude and have been working on it for a week now. There are already a lot of threads about this piece, but I have not found anything yet that covers fingering.
I have a question on the fingering of the right hand in the second-sixth figure which appear throughout the piece frequently. Here's a snap of those figures:



I use the fingering as it is written in this example. But I also saw people play it with 1215 which to me is not as efficient, but seems to be working for some. It is obviously easier to play the sext interval with 1-5 instead of 2-5, but the latter will help to increase speed going down chromatically.
If you have played this etude what did you use? Or what would you use if you started this?

I am more than happy to play that 1315 or even 1215, because the etude is not played at a speed where that particular efficiency is important.

If you do the fingering 1325 then you will develop better technique, and more fluidity in your fingers.

This is all my opinion.

Although there are fingering "rules", in the end, fingering is very personal and it's up to you, as long as the intended nuance remains and YOU DON'T HURT YOURSELF!!

Which pianist was it who said that they never fingered music the same way twice in a row? Artur Rubinstein or...?

1215 for me, makes rotation easier. I understand the benefits of 1325 though.

Me too.
It never occurred me to wonder about anything else.


I don't.

Among other things, take the slurring.

Each 4-note-thing is a unit. I can imagine 1325 being arguable if the phrasing were in longer units. But for each 4-note-unit getting separate emphasis, "1325" just bollixes it up.

Plunk your thumb down on each first note and keep your hand in that position for the 4 notes, than pick up your hand (sort of) and move it and plunk the thumb down on the next first note.

Especially in view of that phrasing, I cannot imagine why anyone would want to 'smooth out' the fingering by doing something like 1325.

Thank you all for the replies!

As you all seem to be playing 1215 I'll give that a try too. I don't want to smooth things out, but play it as convenient and as efficient as possible.

I wonder though, do you also not change fingers when the left hand plays the figure? 4341 instead of 4231? For example in M6. That would make it very hard in my opinion to play it even.

I just started this so time will tell what my preference will be. It will take a long I guess to get the thing up to speed!

Good question! I don't know if my answer will be helpful because I'm not that good.
But maybe that can be just as helpful as an answer from someone who is real good, because some of them have no trouble playing stuff no matter what fingering they use.

BTW I think that's somewhat true. A person whose technique is top notch might usually just play most things with whatever fingering occurs to them first, and it won't matter. In this piece, for example, I know that for some people these passages are almost 'child's play' and fingering is no issue.

Back to the subject....I've tried it every which way, and switched back and forth. I've wound up not "changing fingers." If my technique were better, I'd definitely not want to change fingers, because of what I said in my other post -- i.e. for musical reasons -- but I tried other ways because these passages are very hard for me and so I experimented with whatever else I could think of.

I do think that musically it's best to do the simple fingering, but I can imagine that for some people it might be more practical to change fingers.

I find 1325 easier because, as soon as the 2 is placed the hand relaxes slightly more open which places the thumb close to the next note. Playing with 1315 or 1215 constrains the thumb and forces the hand to flex open twice in the same space of time instead of once when using 1325. This, coupled with the slight forearm rotation when rocking from 5 to 1 helps keep the hand relaxed.

As a rule I like to change fingers, but I find it uncomfortable in this particular piece. There are some in the left hand where I change fingers.

I'm currently learning this piece also. My teacher suggested 1215.

He demonstrated the piece during lesson. He had no problem with "efficiency" using 1215. Gosh! If only you get to see and hear him play. I'm sure he would have no problem with 1325 either!

I suppose I have a tendency to stretch my hands and/or using larger rotational movements than necessary. Maybe that's why he prescribed 1215 for me.

What prout said.

I think it would be good to be able to relax as much as possible with this piece. There are some places where it is awkward to play with changing fingers. Then 121 is still an option.
Tubbie, how long have you been practising this etude? I just started it about 10 days ago. I'm able to play it comfortably at a slow speed now without trouble. My teacher thinks exaggerated wrist movement is a good thing, also with exaggerated accents when playing slow. What do you find the most difficult in this piece technically and musically?

And thanks Mark for your reply! Are you saying you can induce a better attack when not changing fingers? I would say the opposite because your thumb would have more time to prepare for the next note..

For me at least, the attack is easier and better with 1215 because with the other fingerings, the hand shifts around a bit from the 'changings.' With 1215, the hand sort of stays in the same place, and then gets a sudden shift from the stationary state onto the next thumb note -- which gives a natural and automatic emphasis on it (more than if the hand has been more in motion), which is what I think the music asks for. (As indicated by the slurring. Notice that the slurring on these passages is different than it is for most of the rest of the piece. I would even say that the slurrings are sort of fingering indications!! -- i.e. almost implying 1215.)

The idea that the phrasing marks imply a given fingering is well worth considering and trying. The only question is are the phrasing marks in a given piece the composer's or the editor's?

I do the reverse when playing baroque music using early fingering techniques (little or no thumb.) The phrasing arises from the fingering.

In my experience, phrase marks are very seldom editorial additions by the mid-19th century because they are an essential aspect of the score in so many ways. Fingerings, on the other hand, are not usually important to interpretation and are frequently added by editors. However, this is an etude! So you could argue that the fingering patterns are integral to the technical purpose and hence, because it's a Chopin etude (i.e. not Czerny or Dohler or one of that crowd), integral to the music itself. I'd love to see the final autograph of this piece if it is still extant, if only to confirm one way or the other whether the composer fingered this himself.

As an aside, I used 1215 until I actually took the trouble to look at the indicated fingering, at which point I switched to 1325 and the equivalent in the LH, even though there are cases where that becomes technically awkward. I honestly believe it improved my playing of the piece.

The first edition has some fingerings in it, (and they are full of finger changes on the same notes) though not on these measures. Also interesting is that there are decrescendo markings on each phrase not accents. The use of 1325 would prevent the thumb from reaccenting the same note when using 1315 or 1215.

It could be argued that the decrescendo markings are intended for the left hand only or both, given their location on the grand staff. In either case 1325 would make for an easier an more refined flow of the slur.

In these early editions it is sometimes hard to determine if an accent or a decrescendo is meant, since the engraver's hand does not produce consistent lengths of the hairpins, their length sometimes being decided by the room available into which to engrave them.

The 1325 fingering appears as a hand-written marking in a copy used by Chopin's pupil, Jane Stirling. Presumably, it was written in by Chopin.

The Badura-Skoda urtext prints this fingering, citing an Oxford edition that includes the Stirling markings, although he says the original was lost. However, it appears that the original with those markings is now known to be in the Bibliothèque nationale de France in Paris. I've seen it in digital form online.

To me, it's a good fingering that helps to shape the phrasing, as well as to go easy on the thumb. I don't know how it works at high speed though, because I haven't got to that point with the etude yet.

i use 1-3-2-5

Fascinating. I think there are some other Stirling scores with Chopin's markings (some nocturnes, if I remember correctly, that show pedaling preferences). In any event, it seems highly unlikely that the 1325 fingerings came out of nowhere, like some editor thought "hey, man, that would be a really cool way to finger this figure throughout the etude". To me, everything about the fingering fits with the technical microblast of the etude. We know from Eigeldinger or whatever his name was that Chopin was interested in enhancing flexibility and extension of the individual fingers. This seems to be a prime case of that.

I've seen many of those early editions and it seems pretty clear that a decrescendo is always unambiguous so those accents that seem a bit wide I would bet are almost always accents.

I agree with everything else!

Good to know. Thanks.