mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description
Select: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Notation
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

b. 3

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

..

In A one can see a crossing-out between the  and the 3rd quaver. It was most probably the  before a that was removed (superfluous), yet it seems that, for some reason, Chopin also crossed out the correctly written f-a third, which he then reintroduced next to it. If it was so, the reason could have been, e.g. accidentally blurred noteheads, even partially, as a side effect of removing the natural.

category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Corrections in A , Deletions in A

b. 3

composition: Op. 28 No. 20, Prelude in C minor

Continuous slur in A (→FC→GE, →FE→EE) & ACh

2 slurs from 1st beat in AB

2 slurs from 2nd beat in CGS
..

The slurs of CGS in these bars are most probably doubly inaccurate, both in terms of their number and range. AB also has two slurs, and we consider that the slur in b. 3 encompasses the entire bar (Chopin probably ran out of ink). In turn, in all the sources related to the publication of the Prelude, those bars are encompassed with one slur; the same applies to ACh (we assume that the slur intentionally reaches the end of b. 4 – see the characterization of ACh).  

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A

b. 3

composition: Op. 28 No. 20, Prelude in C minor

..

We add cautionary naturals before d and d1. The accidentals were also added in EE.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions

b. 3

composition: Op. 28 No. 20, Prelude in C minor

e1 in A (literal reading→FE,FC→GE), AB & EE2

e1 in ACh, CGS, EE1 & FES
..

According to us, it is much more likely that the missing  restoring e1, which would result in e1 at the end of the bar, is one of numerous such oversights of Chopin – see, e.g. the note to b. 8 and 12 as well as to the Prelude No. 7 in A Major, b. 13 or No. 18 in F Minor, b. 8. Therefore, we assume that the flats entered or added in ACh, CGS and FES define or restore the only correct text, which we adopt as the main one. However, the version with e1 has a consistent place in the history of music, e.g. as the theme of variations of Feruccio Busoni (BV 213a) and of Sergei Rachmaninoff (Op. 22).
The double revision in EE is noteworthy – first a  was added in EE1 and then it was removed in EE2.  

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Omissions to cancel alteration , Errors of A , Annotations in FES

b. 3

composition: Op. 28 No. 20, Prelude in C minor

..

There is no  restoring b in the 2nd chord in AB, which is a patent oversight.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Omissions to cancel alteration