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. 4

composition: Op. 28 No. 23, Prelude in F major

..

The crossed-out g2 note before the final a2 note, which can be seen in A, and the e2 note, added clearly later, prove that the last 3 semiquavers in the bar were initially f2-g2-a2. 

category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Corrections in A , Deletions in A , Main-line changes

b. 4

composition: Op. 28 No. 22, Prelude in G minor

Slur from 1st quaver in A, interpretation suggested by the editors

Slur from 2. quaver in A (possible interpretation→FC→GE, →FE→EE)
..

a koniec może sugerować połączenie z łukiem w t. 5. Obie możliwości interpretacji końcówki tego łuku znalazły odzwierciedlenie w źródłach,

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A

b. 4

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

e1 on 6th quaver in A (→FE)

e1 on 6th quaver, L.H. finger 1 in EE1

e1 on 6th quaver, R.H. finger 2 in FES

e1 on 3rd beat, under slur in FC (→GE)

e1 on 3rd beat, no slur in EE2
..

Interpreting the top note of the 6th L.H. quaver, e1, as a R.H. crotchet on the 3rd beat of the bar is almost certainly Fontana's mistake. The copyist was most probably misled by the note having been written on the top stave, the poorly visible top fragment of the stem combining that note with c and the dot extending the g1 minim at the beginning of the bar having been crossed out in A (the crossing-out most probably provided for the discussed e1 to be performed with the right hand; in addition, it was probably to be completed by a crotchet rest, which Chopin, however, did not do). Having completed the rhythm of the R.H. melody with that note, Fontana also led to it the phrase mark encompassing the first phrase. The change in EE2 must have been introduced under the influence of GE1. In the main text we give the notation of A (→FE→EE1), supplemented by a crotchet rest.

To eliminate the possibility of creating incoherent combinations of variants from different notes, we include the fingering of EE and FES, which applies to the e1 quaver, here, in the variants including that quaver.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Rhythmic errors , Deletions in A , Errors of FC , Inaccuracies in A

b. 4

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

..

In FC (→GE) the slur reaches e1, which is a crotchet on the 3rd beat of the bar in these sources (filling the bar after the g1 minim), and not the top note of the last L.H. quaver.
See the next note.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors of FC

b. 4-5

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

Slur from 2nd quaver to bar 5 in A (→FE→EE)

Slur from first quaver to bar 5 in FC

Slur from first to 6th quaver in GE
..

In the main text we give the slur of A (→FE→EE). The slur of FC starts a quaver earlier, whereas GE also moved its ending, which made it resemble the previous slurs, thus consolidating a distorted image of articulation of these figures – see the notes in b. 1-2 and 2-4.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FC