Do some people who finger pieces - like, say, Chopin Preludes...play games?

[barnowl]

Say the fingering for Op.28 No. 4 in in Schirmer's Library of Musical Classics.

I'm just a beginner but I really wonder if these people throw in unnecessarily complicated fingerings for reasons of their own. Now I can imagine that the purpose of proper fingering  to enable a pianist to move smoothly from one cord to the next. But some of the stuff these editors prescribe seems totally arty-fartsy — like they're trying to impress the pianistic giants of the world with their oh so clever crapola.

I could very easily attached an example, but then we'd get into the this finger's on C, that finger's on F# and so on, and we'd get bogged down in too many details.

So, I'm just asking for an overall impression from experienced pianists here. And if you insist, I'll attach the prelude edited by Rafael Joseffy.

[thalbergmad]

I ALWAYS work out my own fingering without fail.

Sometimes it is the same as suggested, but more often not.

What is good for one is not always good for another.

Not doing your own fingering is like ordering a pair of gloves without seeing if you can get them on first.

Thal

[pianistimo]

and what might i ask are you needing the gloves for?  i always knew you were half serious about the cape. 

[ganymed]

for opus 28 no. 4 get the cortot edition it has some really cool and easy fingering which makes playing the piece much more convenient

[barnowl]

Thanks for the Cortot Edition suggestion, Ganymed. I'll look into it. Where can I find it online?

But, blimey, no one answered the OP. I can and do work out my own fingering. Who doesn't?

That's not my worry.What ticks me off is the ludicrous fingering some of these editors prescribe. None of you has ever noticed this?

[will]

That's not my worry.What ticks me off is the ludicrous fingering some of these editors prescribe. None of you has ever noticed this?

No I cannot recall ever seeing fingerings that I thought were ludicrous.
I don't think editors intentionally add complicated or inappropriate fingerings - they add what works best for them.
Everyone has a unique physicality and way of moving at the piano so fingering that works for one person may not work for another.
It is also possible that you cannot work out the correct way to move to make the editor's fingering easy. See https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php/topic,4957.0.html

[leucippus]

Fortunately, I learned extremely early that fingerings are mere suggestions and that everyone may have their own preferences.  Like Thalbernhard, I always work out my own fingerings.

Some music comes with fingerings that I simply find extremely difficult to play, and if I can play it with ease and more comfort by using my own fingering that's what I'll do.  I'm not out to learn how to tolerate other people's fingering suggestions, I'm out to learn how to play the piano comfortably!

A couple things come to mind here:

First, some people's suggested fingering may simply not be right for someone else.

Second, publishers might just toss in some poor fingerings real quick JUST so they can say that their score include fingerings!  Considering the nature of businesses that wouldn’t surprise me in the least.  In fact, like you say, some of the fingering suggestions are so bad it makes me wonder if anyone could possibly play it like that.  I chalk it up to either typos, or very crude guessing by publishers who can't really play.

Finally, there is the possibility of poor fingering being put on pieces on purpose.  Especially advanced pieces.  Almost like the publisher (or whoever is doing the finger notation) feels that anyone who's playing this piece and still needs fingering suggestions deserves to be misguided.

I've gotten pretty good at working out my own fingerings now.  Although, it's still nice to have score with suggestions here and there at least.  I'm currently learning one of Mendlessonh's songs without words and it came with fingering.  Some of it I'm glad for the suggestion.  Other places I prefer to use my own.

I would never play something uncomfortably just to match up with fingerings on score, especially if I could play it differently and it felt more natural for me.  The most natural feel has got to be the best fingering overall in any case.

[Floristan]

Yes, I've noticed, and I was just explaining this to a non-musician yesterday, as part of an explanation of why urtext scores are a good thing (no fingering for the most part, as composers rarely do fingering, with obvious exceptions like Chopin's etudes, which he fingered as a guide to his technique).

1. The 19th century,  people liked to believe everything would eventually be summed up in a theory.  So there were theories about fingering.  I believe many 19th century editors worked from these theories, and often each editor promulgated his own theory of fingering.  E.g., always use 2-3-4 on the black keys and never 1 or 5.  Mostly that's a good rule of thumb, but if applied without fail to every piece of music, some music (Bach, for instance) becomes unplayable without distorting the hand a lot.  Here's another that I've seen in many editions from 19th-century editors:  When playing a triad and the upper note is a line that needs to be articulated and/or played legato, finger the upper voice using 3-4-5 even if it means stretching the hand a lot to accommodate the other notes.  This is comfortable only if the pianist has big hands with long fingers.  Those of us with stubby fingers or smaller hands would have to stretch to a point of extreme tension to reproduce some of these fingerings.  Chopin made an etude out of using 3-4-5 to play a legato line (Op. 10, No. 2), but he doesn't make you hold down other tones while you're doing it.

2. Even if an editor doesn't work from fingering theories (and many 20th-century editors don't appear to), he/she works from his/her own equipment.  Fingerings from female editors often accommodate smaller hands than fingerings from male editors.  It's very individual, which is why we have to figure out what works for each of us individually.

My general experience is that 19th-century editions often have fingerings that don't work for me, but that 20th-century editions often have fingerings that do work for me.  Also, 20th-century editors are better about letting you know what they've added (pedaling, phrasing, etc.)  I talk to other pianists I know and trust and get recommendations on editions.  If I find an edition I like, then usually much of the fingering will work for me, and I'll only have to alter some of it.  If I can't find an edition I like, I like to work from urtext and do my own editing.  Often it's a mix of both -- for example, I like a lot of Palmer's fingerings in the Bach inventions and sinfonias (Alfred edition), and I often agree with his phrasing, but I find all the phrasing marks he uses distracting.  IMHO he over-edits the phrasing.  So I use urtext, write in a lot of Palmer's fingerings and some of my own, and feel less inhibited by not having to look at Palmer's very precise phrasing.  That's just me.  

[maestoso]

i like to use the fingerings that are there even if they are hard, cause it is somewhat of an exercise. im a beginner on piano, but classical guitar is fingered for the quickest possible change so i just approach it as that's what their doing.

[phil13]

I almost never end up using the exact same fingering as the editor's suggestion! Everyone's hand is different.

I have a version of the Rach preludes where two notes- C# and D#- are repeated trill-like, with the following fingering:

1324132413241324

I prefer to just use 23, it works better for me.

Phil