mUltimate Chopin

Op. 28 No. 1, Prelude in C major

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. 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

b. 1

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

..

category imprint: Differences between sources; Source & stylistic information

issues: Errors in FE , FE revisions

b. 2-32

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

Slurs from rest in A (→FE)

Slurs over semiquavers in FC (→GE) & EE
..

In b. 2-17, 22 and 28-32, in which the R.H. figure begins from the rest and is encompassed with one slur, the starting point of those slurs in A is unclear. The vast majority of the slurs begin over or even before the initial rest (b. 4, 10, 13-15), hence only the slurs in b. 5 and 17 seem to concern the notes only. The notation does not indicate an intention to differentiate between the range of those slurs (the differences are accidental inaccuracies); therefore, we consider that all of them encompass an entire bar. This is the version we give in the main text. On the other hand, Chopin would often write slurs with a flourish; consequently, we cannot rule out that it was also here that he wanted the slurs to encompass the 5-semiquaver figures only. This is how it was reproduced by Fontana in his copy, which was then repeated in GE. In turn, the notation of FE poses an analogous interpretative issue to the one in A – admittedly, the majority of the slurs begin over the rest (the ones in b. 28-32 even before), but the general picture is unclear, since the endings of those slurs also go far beyond the last semiquaver, which, of course, does not mean that they are supposed to reach further. In EE, based on FE, the slurs encompass the semiquavers only.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Inaccurate slurs in A , EE inaccuracies , Inaccuracies in FC