mUltimate Chopin

Op. 28 No. 3, Prelude in G major

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

Pitch

b. 7-10

composition: Op. 28 No. 3, Prelude in G major

..

FCI does not contain any accidentals in the R.H. part in these bars. The missing sharps in b. 7 and 9 are a patent inaccuracy (formally speaking, a cautionary  in b. 10 is not indispensable due to the presence of corresponding sharps in the L.H., i.e. raising c1 to c1). Such an incomplete notation was probably present already in the lost autograph that served as the basis for this copy, since it seems unlikely that the copyist would selectively omit marks on the top stave (see also b. 16-17).
There is no  in bar 7 in FC, too – the visible accidental was pencilled in by H. Scholtz, the later owner of FC. The obvious oversight was corrected in GE.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals , Errors of FC

b. 8-11

composition: Op. 28 No. 3, Prelude in G major

..

In b. 8, 10 and 11, one can see in A crossings-out in the L.H. part, which was initially written an octave higher. 

category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Corrections in A , Deletions in A

b. 9

composition: Op. 28 No. 3, Prelude in G major

..

In A (→FE1) there is no  raising c1 to c1 at the beginning of the 2nd group of semiquavers. That patent oversight of Chopin was corrected by Fontana in FC (→GE) and FE2 (EE). The accidental is also in FCI.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Accidentals in different octaves , FE revisions , Fontana's revisions , Inaccuracies in A , Errors repeated in FE

b. 14

composition: Op. 28 No. 3, Prelude in G major

Long accent in FCI, literal reading

 in FCI (contextual interpretation) & GE2 (→GE3)

No sign in A (→FC→GE1, →FE→EE)
..

It is unclear how to interpret the  mark in FCI. Due to the abridged notation of the L.H. part and the manner of writing semibreves more or less in the middle of the bar, it can be considered both a whole-bar  hairpin (the mark begins under the d2-b2 sixth, i.e. at the beginning of the bar, and ends close to the end of the bar) and a long accent (it has the right length and position with respect to the sixth). Actually, a similar problem can be observed already in analogous b. 5, in which, however, we consider the mark written in A as a hint on how to resolve this doubt. In the discussed bar we give both possibilities, since the absence of the mark in A does not allow us to directly support any of them; moreover, the mark in FCI is slightly shorter than the one in b. 5.
GE2 added a whole-bar  hairpin, certainly by analogy to b. 5.

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

issues: Long accents , GE revisions

b. 16-17

composition: Op. 28 No. 3, Prelude in G major

..

In FCI there are no naturals lowering f2 to f2 in these bars. It must be an inaccuracy of notation – see the comment on b. 18-22.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Omission of current key accidentals