A real Chopin edition has two specific and distinct tasks:

1. Provide a text reviewed on strictly philological bases;
2. Illustrate the distinctive features—that an issue can put on paper, of course—of the new piano school that Chopin had thought up and which is based both on the quality of the touch and a correct diction, which you can get by a good knowledge of “Belcanto”, an absolute mastery of “legato” and great sensitivity to the rhythm, i.e. breathing. Now, fingering and pedalling are the second and third foundation that a good critical edition can and must include (the first one, i.e. the touch, can only be provided by a competent teacher. —About the touch, we want to emphasize that all piano competitions devoted to Chopin, where the candidate can choose the piano he is going to play—a piano which can be insensitive to the variety of the individual touches—are the most disconcerting negation of the Chopin piano school. Since everybody knows that the most important competitions because of the various more and/or less public financings look like a tasty cake, whose confectioners want their own slice, such pseudo-cultural events are an insult to the music and the genius of the musician, to whom they are devoted). As in indicating the pedalling Chopin himself was wavering, the editor-philologist must treat it like any other component of the music text (it will be the teacher to illustrate the use of Chopin). As for the fingering, instead, which is rare (except in the Etudes), being the edition of Mikuli (Mk) available—that, of course, published by Kistner, not the one published by Schirmer—together with the scores of other pupils, the editor-philologist has the duty to deal with.

That said, we immediately enter into details. Currently, the best edition, as a whole, is the Polish one, edited by Jan Ekier (WN), which, however, has many faults:

1. It is not a real critical edition, since the publisher is not a philologist or, at least, did not prove to be that.
2. Consequently, there is a strong trend toward normalization, standardization, that is all that seems strange or unusual is flattened, trivialized.
3. The abuses, that is notes and other things Chopin did never write, are many.
4. The commendable care for fingering (which is not always the editor's work) reveals however an insufficient knowledge of the basic principles underpinning the new Chopin piano school. And to think that Ekier is one of the few to have understood something!

Now, briefly, let us review the various works in alphabetical order.

Works for solo piano:
Allegro de concert. For text: WN. For fingering: also Mk.
Ballades: ➨ our free edition. The new Peters edition (edited by Samson) and the Henle new edition (by Müllemann) are to be avoided, especially the former, which contains errors and inaccuracies.
Barcarolle. For text: WN. For fingering: also Mk. — [July 2020. As for HN and BR, see the review.]
Berceuse. For text: WN. For fingering: also Mk. — The notes of the new HN Berceuse edition by Müllemann (2015) are the same as in the previous one by Herttrich (1978). About the nonsensical (ex. gr. in fingering), even ridiculous (ex. gr. in “sigla”), oddities of the new Chopinian edition published by Henle we already talked somewhere else. The Vorwort and the footnotes enjoy an English and French translation, but the Bemerkungen are translated only into English! What is real new is the pedalling. The curious student, who wants to amuse himself and to learn something, can compare both editions (WN and HN) of such a masterpiece.
Bolero. For text: WN. For fingering: also Mk.
Etudes. No edition is satisfying. The best text was in the Urtext edition by E. Rudorff (1899) no longer reprinted. Alternatively, despite the many abuses, WN, where, however, till now we have found one only typo (p. 99, m. 23, r. h.: to the first B a sharp is missing—however, someone reported to us that in the subsequent reprints that typo has been corrected). For fingering: also Mk. — [March 2019. We owe an apology to our Reader, because we neglected to mention an excellent edition of the Etudes, which deserves every consideration: it is the one edited by Paul Badura-Skoda and published in two issues by Schott/Universal Edition in 1973. In some cases—as for instance in measures 7 and 8 of Etude No. 6 Op. 25—it offers a better reading than WN. So, whoever owns this edition has no need to resort to anyone else. Paul Badura-Skoda, moreover, in 1956 recorded the whole cycle (WESTMINSTER MSC -LP 60009, republished in 2009 by MUSIC&ARTS CD-1230): to date his interpretation is still one of the best).] — [September 2021. As for the Trois Nouvelles Études see also our review of the recent Peters edition.]
Fantaisie. For text: WN. For fingering: also Mk.
Impromptus. For text: the new Peters edition (PT), edited by Irving and Grabowski. For fingering: Mk. Unfortunately, PT contains some insidious typos, which we pick out: —p. 1, m. 3, l. h.: the first note must be C not E flat; —p. 3, m. 44, l. h.: it is E flat that has to be natural, not B flat; —p. 11, m. 73, l. h.: the second eighth of the first triplet must be C not E; —p. 29, m. 79, l. h.: the second eighth of the second sextuplet must be B flat not F. —As to inaccuracies, compare e.g. the Impromptu in C sharp minor: —m. 56, l. h.: the last G flat has an accent in PT, nothing in WN, no comment; —m. 67, r. h.: the slur starts from B flat in PT, from C flat in WN, no comment; —m. 77, r. h.: the turn is in demisemiquavers in PT (wrong reading), in semiquavers in WN (right reading): no comment. — [April 2019. In 1985 Peters published an Urtext edition of the Impromptus (Nr. 9901) edited by Akira Imai with Paul Badura-Skoda as general editor. From the Preface of P. Badura-Skoda we learn that this was the first volume of a new edition of the piano works of Chopin. A project that for some reason ran aground. A pity, because Paul Badura-Skoda, as general editor of the whole project, was the right person, being not only an excellent pianist, but also a musician of great learning and sensitivity, who gave us, among other things, the best edition of the Etudes (see above) indispensable for any student or professional pianist. This edition of the Impromptus is no longer available. Those who own it can use it with confidence, even if we do not share some textual choices in the second Impromptu (in any case, the Editorial Notes give all useful information). However, the separate edition (Nr. 9901a - ISM: N 979-0-014-10955-4) of the so-called Fantaisie-Impromptu, which offers as “Anhang” the text of the Impromptu in E flat major of Moscheles published by Schlesinger in 1834, is still available: we strongly recommend it.]
Mazurkas. For text: WN. For fingering: Mk. The volume of Mazurkas of Mk, republished by Dover, contains a large number of fingerings all of Chopin.
Nocturnes. For text: WN. For fingering: also Mk.
Preludes Op. 28.: ➨ our free edition. — In October 2019 we managed to obtain the edition of Préludes (op. 28) edited by Paul Badura-Skoda and published by Edition Peters (Nr. 9900), Leipzig/Dresden 1984 (but the Preface is dated "Vienna, June 1985"). It is undoubtedly the best edition ever published, far better than both the previous and the following ones, mainly from a piano-playing standpoint. The only edition that contains absolute novelties compared to the edition by P. Badura-Skoda, is ours. — As for the Bärenreiter edition (August 2016), see the review.
Prelude Op. 45: ➨ our free edition. — As for the Bärenreiter edition (August 2016), see the review.
Polonaises. For text: [from December 2022 our free edition of Op. 26 is available, and from January 2024 the one of Op. 40 (ibid.) as well; as for the other opuses see] WN. For fingering: also Mk. — August 2022: As for the Polonaises published by Wiener Urtext, see our review.
Rondos. For text: WN. For fingering: also Mk.
Scherzos. For text: WN. For fingering: also Mk. — Of the recent (spring 2016) edition of the Scherzo Op. 20 we were about to write a review, but we have no time. Suffice it to say the following. Compared to the previous edition edited by the late Ewald Zimmermann, a prepared and intelligent musicologist, this edited by Müllemann is not better. Besides, an important source is disregarded. So, if you already own the previous edition, you do not need this one. — [March 2019. We have just received the urtext Scherzi-edition published by Henle and edited by Müllemann. This edition shows all the flaws typical of modern urtext editions: 1. Failure to apply the basic principles of philology. 2. Purely descriptive critical apparatus or, better, annotations. 3. It is not clear what the guiding criterion is. Moreover, in this edition in particular: 4. It is not understood what is the criterion of choices. 5. There is no respect for the composer's graphic preferences, i.e. there is contempt for the symbolic value of those preferences. 6. Absurd multiplication of the abbreviations of the sources. 7. Descriptive pedantries, such as those in the edition of the Preludes published by Bärenreiter. 8. Excessive exploitation of space, which makes reading harder (there are several pages with 6 systems). 9. Insufficient fingering and, when there is, it is often improper, etc. etc. However, there is one positive note, only one though: in measure 315 of the Scherzo Op. 39 Müllemann renounces to add notes that Chopin never wrote (as, on the contrary, Ekier does!); on the other hand, however, he notes that that addition is “vielleicht besser” (!), but does not say why! - The price is low (€ 30,00 nice hardcover), but in any case it would be a waste of money. In short, not only is this edition no better than WN—which remains the best—but not even can equal it.]
Sonatas. For text: WN, though quite unsatisfying, but there is no other. For fingering: also Mk.
Tarantella. For text: WN. For fingering: also Mk.
Waltzes. For text: PT is better than WN, but there are errors and inaccuracies, which must be corrected with the comparison of one with the other, e.g.: —Valse pour M^lle Marie (p. 83), m. 4, l. h.: D has a bad natural that does not exist in the autograph; —Valse (p. 68), from the third system: the key signature is wrong, because a flat is missing. For fingering: Mk.
Variations. For text: WN. For fingering: also Mk.
.

Works for piano and orchestra:
Concertos. For text: the new Peters edition (PT), edited by John Rink (in some ways better than the Polish edition), or WN. For fingering: also Mk.

For all remaining compositions, there being nothing better, combine WN and Mk.

All other editions currently on the market should be avoided (some of them like the volumes of the Urtext edition published by Lemoine, with great care). It is advisable to always read the comments, even if they are boring and often unnecessary. The volumes already published of the new Henle edition by Müllemann (HN) do not improve WN, indeed often offer a worse text, in other words, they are not reliable.
The Oxford edition by É. Ganche gave a good text, which, used in conjunction with Mk, could still well replace the current pseudo-critical editions; but, as you know, the former and the latter are no longer on the market. However, you can consult Mk on the website www.polona.pl.

June 2015÷2024.