mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Inaccuracies in A

b. 15

composition: Op. 28 No. 18, Prelude in F minor

..

In A there is no  before the top note of the L.H. chord on the 4th beat of the bar. The patent inaccuracy was already corrected in FC (→GE) and FE (→EE).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Accidentals in different octaves , FE revisions , Fontana's revisions , Inaccuracies in A

b. 16-23

composition: Op. 10 No 7, Etude in C major

Pedalling in A

FE (→GE,EE)
..

The pedalling in A is written rather at random – only the  marks in bars 17 and 21 and the whole-bar long pedalling in bars 19-20. In the main text we give the indications of the version completed by Chopin in a proofreading of FE (→GE,EE).  

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of FE , No pedal release mark , Inaccuracies in A

b. 16

composition: Op. 28 No. 4, Prelude in E minor

No hairpins in As & EE1

  in A, contextual interpretation

  in FC (→GE) & EE2

  in FE

  in CGS
..

The range of the   hairpins in A is unclear, since the  is written at the end of the line, practically already beyond the bar line. In spite of that, diminuendo must concern also b. 16, since at the beginning of b. 17 we can already see a new sign – . This is how it was interpreted both in FC (→GE) and FE (with a slight difference in the range), and this is the interpretation we give in the main text. The absence of the marks in EE1 is most probably a mistake of the engraver, rectified in EE2 on the basis of a comparison with GE1, which is indicated by the compliance of the range of the marks. The hairpins in CGS are most probably inaccurately outlined marks of FE.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Source & stylistic information

issues: EE revisions , Scope of dynamic hairpins , Errors in EE , FE revisions , Fontana's revisions , Inaccuracies in A

b. 16-19

composition: Op. 28 No. 4, Prelude in E minor

stretto - - - in A

stretto - - - in FC

stretto - - - in GE

stretto - - - in FE

stretto - - - in CGS
..

In the notation of A it is not entirely clear where Chopin wanted to begin stretto or how far the dashes marking its range are supposed to reach. Therefore, it comes as no surprise that the remaining sources reproduce those details differently, which we consider inaccuracies, with the exception of the version of GE, in which the dashes are led as far as to the beginning of b. 19, which is clearly contrary to the notation of FC. In the main text we assume that stretto is to be combined rather with g2 than a1 and that the dashes reach f1 in b. 18. The major divergence from the Chopinesque notation is to be seen in CGS, in which stretto is written in the middle of the 1st half of b. 16 and the dashes only just in the 2nd half of b. 17, as a result of which it is actually unclear how they are to be considered jointly (in that copy, just like in FE, the entire indication is placed between the staves). It was probably caused by lack of space between the staves.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , EE inaccuracies , Inaccuracies in FC , Inaccuracies in A , Errors in CGS

b. 16

composition: Op. 2, Variation IV, primitive version

..

Both manuscripts are missing a few necessary accidentals in this bar – a  to g2 and naturals to g2, d1 and g1. In addition, in AsI the  to d2 is missing. On the other hand, in A there is an unjustified  to c1 in the last L.H. figure. The latter and both accidentals written in A to the topmost R.H. notes are placed much lower than the noteheads they concern.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Source & stylistic information

issues: Accidentals in different octaves , Cautionary accidentals , Omission of current key accidentals , Accidental below/above the note , Inaccuracies in A