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. 14, Prelude in E♭ minor

Allegro in A (→FC→GE, →FE→EE)

Largo in FES
..

Largo written in FES instead of Allegro, which was crossed out, is most probably a teaching correction – it indicates the way the piece should be practised, and not a change of concept of the Prelude. Placing the Prelude in E Minor provided with Largo between the Preludes in F Major and D Major (Lento and Sostenuto, respectively) seems to be unlikely due to the structure of the entire cycle.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FES , Authentic post-publication changes and variants

b. 1

composition: Op. 28 No. 14, Prelude in E♭ minor

 in A (→FC→GE)

 in FE (→EE)
..

The change of time signature from  to  is a frequent inaccuracy of French editions – cf., e.g. the Etude in C, Op. 10 No. 1, b. 1. In the second book of Preludes, in all three provided with  in A, i.e. E Minor, No. 14, B Minor, No. 16 and F Minor, No. 18, it was reproduced as . 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , 4/4 or 2/2

b. 1

composition: Op. 28 No. 14, Prelude in E♭ minor

..

Chopin initially wrote marcato instead of pesante in A.

category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Corrections in A , Deletions in A

b. 1

composition: Op. 28 No. 13, Prelude in F♯ major

3/2 in sources

6/4 suggested by the editors
..

In the sources, the time signature is 3/2. It is Chopin's mistake (the correct time signature is 6/4), perhaps related to the change of notation – Chopin started writing the Prelude with half the rhythmic values, which is evidenced by the reduced number of beams (one of the beams was crossed out) in the 1st accompaniment figure and by the dotted crotchets constituting the 1st R.H. chord (which was crossed out). The initial time signature was carefully blacked out, hence its interpretation is uncertain; however, it was most probably 6/8. 

category imprint: Editorial revisions; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Corrections in A , Errors resulting from corrections , Rhythmic errors , Deletions in A

b. 1-2

composition: Op. 28 No. 14, Prelude in E♭ minor

Asymmetric     in bar 1 in A, literal reading

Asymmetric     in bars 1-2 in A, contextual interpretation

Symmetric   in bar 1 in FC (literal reading→GE)

Symmetric   in bars 1-2 in FC, contextual interpretation
..

The   hairpins are of different length in A, which we reproduce in the main text. Both Fontana in FC (→GE) and the engraver of FE (→EE) considered it an inaccuracy and inserted symmetrical, half-bar marks. Moreover, including those marks in b. 2 (written in an abridged manner with •/• marks, which mean that b. 1 should be repeated) is an issue. According to us, it would be opportune to repeat those marks, as it was performed in FE (→EE), since they are an integral part of the sonic shape of this figuration. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Inaccuracies in FC