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. 1

composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione

No indication in A1

Lento con gran espressione in CJ, CK (→CB) & EL
..

In A1, which is of working nature, Chopin had not determined the piece's tempo or mood yet.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Revisions in EL

b. 1

composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor

No mark in AI

Long accent in AF (→FE) & GE

Short accent in EE
..

There is no accent in AI, since Chopin at some point decided not to finish this manuscript, e.g. in b. 1-15, there are no accents (out of a few ones) or staccato dots (see the description of AI). The short accent in EE is an inaccuracy resulting from the ignorance of the difference in meaning between the Chopinesque short and long accents.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , EE inaccuracies

b. 1

composition: Op. 28 No. 1, Prelude in C major

Title & dedica­tion in A

FC

FE

GE

EE1

EE1a & EE2
..

In the main text we give the title and the dedication in accordance with FE, which reproduced the title as found in A and took into account Chopin's wish expressed in a letter to Fontana, i.e. Chopin wanted the Preludes to be dedicated to C. Pleyel and not J. C. Kessler. However, it remains unclear why the change of dedication was not considered in GE, despite it having been written in FC. The wording of the title and the dedication in English as well as calling the Preludes “grand” and adding the information “through all keys” are all arbitrary decisions of EE.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Dedications

b. 1

composition: Op. 28 No. 1, Prelude in C major

in A (→FC,FE →EE)

in GE
..

It is difficult to explain the origin of the version of GE –  in FC is clear, which practically excludes misinterpretation; moreover, there is no reason why the engraver or reviser would have needed to change that indication (Chopin did not participate in the creation of GE). Chopin would generally use mezza voce to determine the grade of dynamics between   and , usually written down as m.v. The uncommon indication  was written in A in a similar manner, i.e. as , which we reproduce only in the graphical transcription (the version "transcription"). 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions

b. 1-28

composition: Op. 28 No. 1, Prelude in C major

 signs before 6th semiquaver in A

 at end of bar in FC (→GE) & FE (→EE)
..

The placement of the  asterisks in A is questionable. The marks were being entered rather hastily, while the evaluation of their intended correlation with the time course of music is hampered due to the erroneous placement of the L.H. quaver rests with respect to the R.H. semiquavers – Chopin would enter rests more or less in the middle of the 2nd half of each bar. It leads to such situations as, e.g. in b. 3 and 15, in which the  occurs before the L.H. rest (i.e. in the 1st half of the bar, actually), but under the 5th semiquaver in the R.H. Apart from a few exceptional situations, which we discuss separately (b. 13-14 and 29-32), one can state the following:

  • All  occur under the 5th semiquaver or later, whereby the majority – 15 out of 26 – concern the 6th semiquaver. Therefore, the differences are insignificant and are almost certainly accidental inaccuracies.
  • The only place where Chopin deemed it necessary to correct the already written mark – in b. 23 – concerns the  written at the end of the bar, after the 6th semiquaver; consequently, it was moved under the 5th semiquaver. According to us, Chopin most probably wanted to avoid the  combination, which most often indicates a syncopated pedal change.

In the remaining sources the pedalling is – except for a few minor inaccuracies – fully unified, with an  asterisk under the 6th semiquaver of each bar. It is generally compliant with the notation suggested by us; however, it can suggest the aforementioned continuous pedalling with changes under the bars, contrary to the intention of Chopin.

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

issues: Inaccuracies in A