Notes to Bach Invention No. 4

[eins]

I've got to start somewhere, so why not start with the right piece! Where can I find Bach's Invention No. 4 to print? Preferrably a version that has the intendedly difficult fingering. Thanks

[Rach3]

What to you mean by "intendedly difficult fingering"? Fingerings are intended to be as easy as possible. Awkwardness doesn't do any good.

A fingered version is here:
http://www.sheetmusicarchive.net/compositions_b/b2part_4.pdf

[eins]

Thank you Rach,
These look like they have the fingering I wanted.

Chang writes in his book about this piece, that the fingering for the triplets, 345, is not as easy as 234 would be, but 345 gives you extra exercise for the weaker fingers. That is what I was looking for.

Best

[Rach3]

Interesting exercize. By the way, there are no triplets in this piece - it's in 3/8.

[eins]

Hmmm, no triplets?

Chang needs to be made aware of this. He is going into quite some detail about those triplets. In case  you have his book, look at 1.3.19.3

What does he mean?

[terminal]

Lol, what triplets...

Well just for starters I just broke this piece down when I played it, there is only 4 or 5 motif's here. Just get them working on different hands smoothly and slowly (there are a couple of inversions or backwards versions of the motifs too..) once you get them down it is just a matter of where you start from for each motif and go from there. Starting at measure 18 I just worked two notes on the top bar in a 3 1 fingering for each note on the bottom, after two or three passes it just became natural. The book I have shows them as two notes per, I am sure you can double that 

It's also a great piece for working out any thumb under issues. But scales and arpegios work better for that.

I like the Kalmus version, I have some of the same inventions in an Alfred book but this is better.

If you have access to a recording of the inventions (I have the Gould version) check out the simfonina #2 it really is a nice piece, if I ever get back to working on the inventions I will do that one...

[CC]

PLEASE don't misquote me! I did not say that the 345 are triplets; in fact I was saying that the apparent 2 triplets are actually 3 doublets!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  ie, 345345 is easy to play as 2 triplets, but in this piece, it must be played as 3 doublets, which is harder (Bach's intention).  If this isn't clear yet, tell me what's confusing you.

[eins]

I'm not confused at all. Ignorance is bliss, and this is all Chinese to me (forgive the pun). Doublets, triplets, these are just words. I have yet to understand the meaning in music language.

Sorry, but I am a beginner.

Thanks for chiming in and clearing it up, though. At least now I know what not to talk about again for a while