Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Chopin's Nocturne in C# Minor

The sheet music I have for this piece doesn't have the series of (32nds?) that are added in most recordings I hear of this wonderful piece, eg in the 6th measure.

http://www.chopinmusic.net/media/sheet/NocturneP2.pdf

1. Was wondering firstly if someone could point me in the direction of sheet music that does include the extra notes in question.

2. Have these been added over time, i.e not by Chopin himself?

Hi stephenc, I have the urtext edition which gives two versions of this posthumously published Nocturne, but neither has any extra notes or decoration in the sixth bar. I just checked the various recordings I have (including Angela Lear who is reliable IMO) and there are no extra notes there either. So I'm curious to know to which pianists you are referring who add the 32nd notes?

Best wishes, Mary-Rose on a wet grey day near London

Hi MaryRose, a wet, grey day near London..how odd!

I'm not certain that they are 32nd notes, but they are quick, check out this amateurs recording of the piece...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CFxlZQpvtF0

The piece was of course the theme in "The Pianist". That had the additional notes also.

I hope that unusual spell of weather passes in a hurry for you!

Sotto Voce :

Anecdotal evidence indicates that the posthumous C# minor Nocturne was written as an exercise for Chopin's sister to prepare her for studying the Second Piano Concerto.

While I don't have quite the disdain that you have for this work, I do agree that its loss would not have had a negative impact on the oeuvre of Chopin; it's a work that I have played through once or twice, but it is simplistic, has little substance and I certainly wouldn't spend time on it when there are so many other wonderful works by this composer one can spend a lifetime with.

I, too, being very fond of the Nocturne Op 27 No 1, expect, every time I read "the C# minor Nocturne" hope that someone is going to open a discussion on that work, but it's always the posthumous one that gets the attention. I do think the posthumous Nocturne has an immediate - albeit not long lasting - appeal, and it is relatively easy to play. How much more wealth and depth, however, can be found in the easier Preludes and Mazurkas.

Does anyone want to start a thread about the "great C# minor Nocturne"?

Regards,

stephenc: thanks for the link. I listened and the music is exactly as in my Henle Verlag edition - there are no extra notes! I have another edition (the Polish one) but it's at home and I am not. I also have a recording of the Pianist at home so I'll check when I return and let you know if I hear extra notes there. Perhaps you are being so lulled by the magic of the music that you are getting carried away in your imagination :-) Good luck with your work on this piece.

Sotto Voce - I agree with you that it's not fair to count the works that Chopin wanted destroyed as part of his oevre. Nonetheless, when going to the link provided by stephenc above, and hearing a tender but not-brilliant amateur rendition, I have to admit I was seduced. On paper, I agree with you. When actually having to confront those sounds - from a work that we were not even meant to hear - I find I am unable to concur with the view that it is a "dreary and uninspired sketch". There is a glimmer of "our" Chopin there, and that glimmer is enough to move my heart even though my mind wants to agree with you.

Hi Sotto voce,

You shouldn't forget that the posthumous nocturnes are the ones that are the easiest to learn. They serve as a good introduction of beginners to Chopin's works, and by that alone, they have merit. In my case, I think the e minor (Op72-1) and c sharp minor nocturnes were among the first 5 Chopin pieces I ever learned.

In terms of their musical worth: I, for one, am very glad that the posthumous works were published. My appreciation of Chopin is richer for it.

As an anecdote: I didn't think much of the e-minor nocturne, even years after I had learned it, until I heard Horowitz's rendition(EMI classics, "Vladimir Horowitz: Recordings 1930-1951, 3 CD-set). The pure poetry in his rendition shook me to the core. And I was embarrassed of my disdain for this nocturne. Nothing was wrong with the piece; it was me--I just couldn't "hear" its poetry.

Is this nocturne, or the c sharp minor, a complicated piece? No. Can it be compared to, say, the Barcarolle or the Polonaise-Fantasie in stature? Absolutely not. But its essence is still Chopin-- and I am just so happy that these posthumous works are available for me to appreciate.

--c5

You need to purchase a score. Edition Peters and Alfred make nice scores that aren't too expensive.

Hi maryrose, well now i'm totally confused, have you looked at the pdf of the sheet music I posted in my opening post? If you get a chance to listen to the piece again, follow the pdf music to say measure 6 and you'll find that what is played is not what is written. Maybe this is a watered down version? Thanks for your time!

In relation to the other discussion about the work, this is the first Chopin piece I am attempting and I must say that I am very suprised by some of the comments suggesting the piece was a waste of the paper it was written on.

Maybe people dislike it so much because it has become, dare I say it, a "mainstream" piece. For it to have been selected as the main theme of a blockbuster, multi-million dollar movie, must surely suggest that it has enormous popularity. I wonder.. if Chopin himself had not expressed his distaste for the piece, whether his fans of today would condemn the piece? Maybe it was the works simplicity that Chopin was not proud of given the great technical prowess required to play other of his magnificent works?

What a controversial introduction to his works!

I downloaded the Chopin's Nocturne in C# Minor sheet music some three weeks ago, and I started playing it. For guidance I downloaded two mp3, one played by Andrys and the second by Sean-Bennett. They both seem to play the second and fourth notes of measure one as 1/16 instead of 1/8. Could someone enlighten me as to why those two notes are played faster than what is on the score? Thanks

And here I thought I was getting a reputation for quickly condemning pieces that weren't to the majority's preference.
SV, you make a good point about this work vs. the "real" works of Chopin, but as you correctly point out, there is no accounting for taste.
I happen to like the Nocturne in C#min, not my favorite piece, but quickly learned and gets some press time as in the Pianist and a popular favorite at some recitals.
I've commented about other pieces, like the Rach Prelude V (23/5) that seem embarassingly bad, with the exception of the beautiful middle lyrical section. I got death threats because I dared point out that this piece was not to my liking.
But, as we all know, the great composers did produce many fine pieces, but occasionally there was some less stellar (politically correct for garbage) works that they churned out, too.

Craig

"It can't even be compared to the other posthumous pieces!" expostulates Sotto Voce.

Not even the Galop Marquis? <VBG>

stephenc - I'll have another look at your pdf tomorrow 'cos it's nearly midnight here now - unless someone more qualified than me can do it in the meantime?

Goodnight all!

The performance you linked to seems to tie the two high C#s in bar 6, but otherwise follows the score as in the PDF. In particular, it does not add any extra notes in that bar.

Ignore the naysayers. It isn't his most profound work, and it has perhaps been a little 'overexposed' recently, but it is an attractive and accessible slice of genuine Chopin.

Best wishes,
Matthew

Sotto Voce,

Did you edit your initial post?? I see now that your criticism is of the c-sharp minor nocturne in particular. Somehow I got the impression (originally) that you thought most/all of posthumous works should NOT have been published. I guess that was what I was arguing against.

Anyhow, to each his/her own. An amateur pianist has great freedom in choosing what to play or not play. For those that are studying this nocturne and love it, all the more power to them.

Sotto Voce, if you do record any of the works by Chopin, please upload the recording-- as another Chopin enthusiast, I would love to hear your interpretations. I'm always working on Chopin's music myself, and with a MiniDisc recorder now, hope to put up some clips sometime

--c5

p.s. SV, while I respect your passion and candor, maybe we could move the critical discussion of c-sharp minor nocturne to another thread? I do feel badly for people who are trying to learn this piece (which, after all, is what this thread is about). We shouldn't be discouraging them.

I downloaded the Chopin's Nocturne in C# Minor sheet music some three weeks ago, and I started playing it. For guidance I downloaded two mp3, one played by Andrys and the second by Sean-Bennett. They both seem to play the second and fourth notes of measure one as 1/16 instead of 1/8.

Could someone enlighten me as to why those two notes are played faster than what is on the score? Thanks

Dear Sotto Voce,

Hmmm, you certainly aren't Sotto Voce about your opinions!

But seriously, please don't take my comment the wrong way, because I do enjoy reading your posts. You have a clarity and spiciness in your writing that makes for a very interesting read.

Having said that: I think Matthew was a bit riled by what he perceived as an "attack" you were making on the posthumous c-sharp minor nocturne.
There are people who are genuinely interested in the piece, and their learning isn't helped by
harsh criticism of the work itself, however true that may be.

Of course, you and I (and anybody else) all have a right to state an opinion. I'm not debating that. However, I also think that one should make the utmost effort of being courteous, and NOT offending people while making ones point.

Let me point out an example where I felt uncomfortable reading your post. In an early post, you wrote:

"No one could be more devoted to Chopin than I am, but that doesn't make me deaf and blind, or make me feel like my heart must prevail over my mind."

Since your post was in direct response to what I wrote, my natural inclination was to wonder if you were insinuating that I was somehow "deaf and blind" because I happen to like the c# nocturne. I KNOW this wasn't your point, --I perceive you as a passionate and candid individual-- but do you see how I could have felt a bit miffed by your statement?

There are indications in other posters messages that they weren't happy with your writing style. I think Matt's "ignore the naysayer" comment was just one of them.

Again, let me reiterate that I enjoy reading your posts. I think your points are logical, and your positions are crystal clear. Could you maybe just tone the edges down, just a little, so that there will be less ill feelings in general?

I have been posting a bit longer than you have--not by much-- but I've made my share of mistakes. Jumping to conclusions, accusing others of ill intent, etc., etc. It makes me fidget in embarrassment to remember those moments.
Anyway, I learned that it helps to tame the spinal reflex, to try to really understand other people's reactions and opinions before responding to them. Most flamewars stem from misunderstandings.

That's all I have to say. I hope it wasn't confrontational. And if I've offended you in any way, please let me know. Peace.

--c5