mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Errors of FC

b. 22-23

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

b1 & b2 in A & FE2 (→EE)

b1 & b2 in FC (→GE)

b1 & b2 in FE1
..

Before the 7th semiquaver in A there was initially a  (cautionary due to B(1) in the L.H.), which Chopin turned to a . Fontana and the engraver of FE1 misinterpreted that correction by considering it a deletion of the accidental, hence FC (→GE) and FE1 does not contain any accidental before that note, which gives b1. When the figure is repeated an octave higher (at the beginning of b. 23) in FC (→GE), there is also no , which can be explained by an oversight (it would be a puzzling coincidence!) or by a revision, introduced in the belief that it is also here that the alleged crossing-out from b. 22 should be taken into account.
In both places, the naturals visible over the notes were added in FC by H. Scholtz probably in the 1870s.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Corrections in A , Errors resulting from corrections , FE revisions , Errors of FC

b. 23-26

composition: Op. 28 No. 6, Prelude in B minor

in A (→FE→EE)

No sign in FC (→GE) & CGS

   in EE
..

The missing  mark in FC (→GE) is almost certainly a result of an oversight of the copyist. The omission of the mark in CGS is most probably of a similar nature. The addition of the  mark in b. 26 must be a revision of EE, quite frequent in Chopinesque first editions – cf., e.g. the Prelude in C Major, No. 1.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , No pedal release mark , Errors of FC

b. 23-24

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

Continuous slur in A (→FE→EE)

Separate slurs in FC (→GE)
..

The broken slur in FC (→GE) may be explained by an erroneous interpretation of the notation of A, in which b. 23 closes the line. The notation of A is, however, unambiguous – both the ending of the slur in b. 23 and the beginning of the slur in b. 24 (in a new line) clearly indicate that the slur should be continued in this place. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors of FC

b. 23-25

composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor

Arpeggio sign in b. 23 in FC (→GE1)

Arpeggio sign in b. 25 in FE (→EE)

2 arpeggio signs in GE2
..

The missing arpeggio marks in bars 23 and 25 must have resulted from oversights by the engraver of FE and the copyist, respectively. In the main text we give marks in both bars, which almost certainly corresponds to the notation of [A]. A similar addition was introduced in GE2.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Errors of FC

b. 24

composition: Op. 30 No. 1, Mazurka in C minor

..

The sources do not include a  restoring b on the 3rd beat of the bar, which means that this accidental was also absent in [A]. In the main text, we correct this oversight, patent in this harmonic context and generally fairly typical of Chopin.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

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