mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Errors of FC

b. 12-14

composition: Op. 28 No. 16, Prelude in B♭ minor

4 slurs in A (→FE,FC→GE) & EE2

1 slur in EE1
..

The missing slur running from the last L.H. quaver in b. 12 and two subsequent ones in b. 13-14 in EE is a patent mistake of the engraver of that edition.
In FC the beginning of the first of those slurs is missing, which – at least theoretically – results in an ambiguity, as far as the presence or range of that slur is concerned, since the next bar is marked in the manuscripts in an abridged manner as a repetition of b. 12. We assume – like GE, based on FC – that the slur at the beginning of b. 13 is to be taken into account, in its full range, which means that it should also encompass the last quaver in b. 12. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in EE , GE revisions , Errors of FC

b. 13-16

composition: Op. 28 No. 2, Prelude in A minor

L.H. slur in A (→FE→EE)

No slur in bars 14-16 in FC

No slur in bars 13-16 in GE
..

The missing ending of the L.H. slur in b. 14-16 in FC must be a result of distraction of the copyist, who forgot to continue the slur in a new line (he also overlooked the slur in b. 18-19; cf. also the note to b. 5-10). This mistake – not continuing the slur in a new line – was repeated in GE, in which the slur is already absent in b. 13 due to a different division of the text into great staves.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , Errors of FC , Errors repeated in GE

b. 13-32

composition: Op. 28 No. 5, Prelude in D major

Crotchets in A

No crotchets i FC (→GE) & FE (→EE)
..

In each of b. 13-16 and 29-32, Chopin initially separated in A the 3rd and 5th semiquavers (b1-e1 and g1-c1, respectively) as an additional voice consisting of a quaver and a semiquaver: . He then abandoned that voice; he crossed out the beam and the additional stem of the 5th semiquaver. However, he left the additional stem of the 3rd semiquaver; he even prolonged it over the crossed-out beam, which must have meant that the note should be a crotchet. The sense of such corrections was guessed neither by Fontana nor by the engraver of FE.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Errors in FE , Corrections in A , Errors resulting from corrections , Deletions in A , Accompaniment changes , Errors of FC

b. 13

composition: Op. 28 No. 21, Prelude in B♭ major

Staccato dot in A

No mark in remaining sources
..

In the main text we include the staccato dot written in A and omitted – almost certainly due to an oversight of the copyist and the engraver of FE – in all the remaining sources. See also b. 17.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Errors of FC

b. 14-16

composition: Op. 25 No 5, Etude in E minor

..

There is no  in bar 14 before the last note in the R.H. in FC, FE and EE1. Similarly in bar 16, where the sign is absent in FC and EE1, whereas it is present in FE (probably added still in the base text to this edition). These patent oversights of Chopin were completed in GE and EE2 (→EE3). 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Errors in EE , Omissions to cancel alteration , GE revisions , Errors of FC