Finger suggestions for this chord?

[adodd81802]

.

[michael_c]

What piece is it from? I think that the natural sign is badly placed: it should apply to the E, not the D. The chord would then be F, G, Bb, Db, E: harmonically logical and easily playable with one finger per note.

[brogers70]

I'd say just 54321, except that if your index finger is particularly long, you might find 54312 easier.

[piulento]

I agree with michael - I believe the mark is refering to the E.

[adodd81802]

.

[brogers70]

Why not listen to a recording to figure out whether it's the E or D that is natural?

[adodd81802]

.

[louispodesta]

I have circled the 3 chords in question, i'm trying to tell myself i'm reading it wrong, but it sounds hideious, maybe in the context of the song it will be correct but i'm a little lost on fingering ideas.

I can reach a 9th comfortably and 10th around the keys. This looks like F,G,Bb, D,Eb


Trying to use all 5 fingers seems like a no go, and 5 on the F/G  leaves me at an awkward position where my thumb is then on D and 1st on the Eb...

Even if I tried to omit the F I personally find G,Bb,D,Eb a bit awkward....

Okay.

First things first, and that is the logic associated with Earl Wild's statements in his book, as they relate to different fingerings.  Specific to the OP's question is the common myth regarding pedal.

Wild elucidates that the pedal, nor the piano itself, does not always hold true regarding a particular harmony or an emphasis on a special note.

Accordingly, I played this passage and its corresponding measure before it, and I found the following result:

1)  Play the the G Flat chord of the preceding measure (pedaling on the beat), and then strike the F natural, after the third chord, before playing (also pedaling on the first beat) of the next chord).

2)  Both chords should be fingered with 5,3,2.

The result is that the early F natural of the previous measure will carry through to the next chord.

[michael_c]

louispodesta, you seem to be replying to a different question. The question in this thread has nothing to do with pedalling and there is no F natural in the measure preceding the one shown here.

In any case, a quick look at another edition confirmed my suspicion: the natural sign is just badly placed. The top two notes of the chord are E natural and D flat. The same chord appears at the end of the following measure.

If you play the chord with an E flat and a D natural, it not only makes no harmonic sense: it also, as the OP remarked, sounds hideous.

[quantum]

Agree with others, that it appears to be a badly placed natural. 

For a bit of fun if that really was the chord: I would play F and G with 5, the rest following with 3, 2, 1. 

[louispodesta]

louispodesta, you seem to be replying to a different question. The question in this thread has nothing to do with pedalling and there is no F natural in the measure preceding the one shown here.

In any case, a quick look at another edition confirmed my suspicion: the natural sign is just badly placed. The top two notes of the chord are E natural and D flat. The same chord appears at the end of the following measure.

If you play the chord with an E flat and a D natural, it not only makes no harmonic sense: it also, as the OP remarked, sounds hideous.

1)  Unfortunately, as of late, I take an OP at their word and assume that they have already researched other editions.  So, I used a method common to all pianists of the late 19th and early to mid 20th centuries, and I used pedaling to bring in the F natural early for it to carry over into the next measure.

2)  You, like many others who have viewed my original thesis, still view my work as heresy.

3)  Yes to some ears, the first score sounds odd, however, composers and editor publishers have made mistakes forever.  That is why "Your Piano Teacher Taught You Wrong" because you always take the score/scores for granted, regardless.

Daily, I correct mistakes in original editions. As a case in point, I cite a composer by the name of Poulenc.

And, what is my usual solution?  I take the heretical path, and I obtain several recordings of the piece.  Then, I listen as to how a concert pianist's ear and their advisor/producer interpreted a particular work.

In the future, I suggest that the OP and others take the listening approach, which will lead them to a logical conclusion regarding the accuracy of any score.  As a case in point, I obtained a copy of Gabriel Tacchino's recording of the aforesaid Poluenc Piano Concerto.

Why?  Because, his piano teacher (his only student) was Poulenc!!!