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

 in A (→FC→GE, →FE→EE), AB & CGS

in ACh

No marking in CGS
..

The  indication in ACh suggests a slightly different concept of the Prelude, less heroic and dramatic. It is not the only change with respect to the version of A – the cresc. in the last phrase starts in ACh one and a half bar earlier.
The missing indication in CGS must be an oversight – the copyist also forgot to write the time signature on the bottom stave. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in CGS

b. 1

composition: Op. 28 No. 19, Prelude in E♭ major

e1 in A (→FC→GE1, →FE→EE)

g1 in GE2 (→GE3)
..

The change of the 3rd quaver of the bar from e1 to g1, introduced in GE2 (→GE3), most probably originated from analogous b. 9, in which g1 is present in all sources. There is no question that g1 is more natural here from the pianistic point of view as well as more logical in terms of the structure of figurations. Therefore, did Chopin actually commit a Terzverschreibung mistake right at the beginning of a piece? An important argument against that hypothesis is a similar differentiation between b. 1 and 9 in the Etude in E Major, Op. 10 No. 11 (in the Etude, the notation rules out a mistake, since it would have had to encompass 5 chords). In both cases, it was a combination with the preceding figure (in b. 8-9) or its absence (in b. 1) that could have been the reason for the differentiation. Taking into account the above, in the main text we leave the version of A. A similar situation can be found in b. 33.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Terzverschreibung error , GE revisions

b. 1-10

composition: Op. 28 No. 19, Prelude in E♭ major

..

In A (→FC) these bars are numbered for an easier identification while implementing the abridged notation of b. 33-42 as a repetition of b. 1-10.

category imprint: Source & stylistic information

issues: Abbreviated notation of A

b. 1-8

composition: Op. 28 No. 19, Prelude in E♭ major

..

In A one can see crossed-out three-quaver slurs running from the 2nd quaver of each triplet to the 1st quaver of the next one. One can assume that the crossing-out was related to the legato indication added at the beginning of the Prelude. At the beginning of the Etude in A Major, Op. 10 No. 10, we can see an evolution of notation that was perhaps going in a similar direction; in that Etude, Chopin removed the initial accents while proofreading the French edition.

category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Corrections in A , Deletions in A

b. 1-5

composition: Op. 28 No. 15, Prelude in D♭ major

No teaching fingering

Our suggestion based on FES
..

We give the fingering digit over the 1st R.H. note in the main text on the basis of the Chopinesque entry in FES in analogous b. 76 (see General Editorial Principles, p. 17). The first of the digits written in the same copy over the a1 minim in b. 1 is not very legible, yet the respective entry in b. 5 dissipates any possible doubts.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FES