mUltimate Chopin

Op. 28 No. 14, Prelude in E♭ minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description
Select: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

Articulation, Accents, Hairpins

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

b. 8

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

  in A (→FC→GE)

  in FE (→EE)
..

In A the direction of the 2nd dynamic hairpin is unclear – the mark could be described as a  with an additional, shorter arm, which constitutes an angle typical of  marks. According to us, the length of that additional arm points to its accidental nature, and the mark should be interpreted as diminuendo. This is how it was interpreted by Fontana in FC (→GE). The  hairpin in FE is not so much a consequence of the ambiguity described above as a result of a mistake or a revision, which is suggested by a similar range of marks (in that edition) in this and adjacent bars. 

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Inaccuracies in A

b. 16-19

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

2 signs in bars 16-19 in A

2 signs in bars 16-17 in FC (→GE)

1 sign in bars 16-19 in FE (→EE)
..

In A b. 16 ends a line, while the  hairpin ends quite clearly beyond the bar line. Perhaps this was the reason it was combined with the mark in b. 17-19, which resulted in one long . According to us, such an interpretation is unjustified, since in two previous lines the hairpins in A also go beyond the bar line, which is almost certainly merely an inaccuracy (cf. also the inaccurate, overlapping marks in b. 5-6 and 9). Therefore, in the main text we keep the separate marks, particularly since the latter begins only just on the 2nd beat of b. 17. It was also Fontana that did not reproduce the notation of A correctly, since he started writing the mark in b. 17 already at the beginning of the bar, but did not write its ending in b. 18-19.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins , FE revisions , Errors of FC , Inaccuracies in FC

b. 19

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

Staccato dot in A

No mark in FC (→GE) & FE (→EE)
..

The staccato dot, quite distinct in A, was overlooked both in FC (→GE) and FE (→EE), perhaps due to its placement, since it was quite high above the note, on the bottom line of the top stave.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Errors of FC