Verbal indications
|
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 3, Prelude in G major
..
It is evident that Chopin's final decision concerning the tempo of the Prelude was Vivace. The change was almost certainly related to a distinct change of concept of the piece, which was also reflected in other performance markings, which often differ between FCI and the other sources. Moreover, the markings of FCI are more detailed in a number of places, cf., e.g. the category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations |
||||||||
|
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 3, Prelude in G major
..
It seems that the title written in FCI was not added later; therefore, Fontana already knew the name of the piece and its position in the entire cycle at the time of writing (however, it does not prejudge the title of Chopin's autograph). Consequently, the copy comes from the time when Chopin already had a clear vision of the cycle of preludes and was working on completing them. category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||
|
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 3, Prelude in G major
..
The ambiguous abbreviation used in FCI – leg. – could generally be explained as leggiero; however, if that were the case, it is the abbreviation legg. that would be more rational. Therefore, it cannot be ruled out that it was supposed to be legato. (Cf. a similar problem in Lento con gran espressione WN37, b. 6-7.) The change of the grammar form of the indication in EE – which has no influence on its musical meaning – could have been inspired by the uncertainty about the linguistic correctness of the term used by Chopin. Indeed, the then prevailing form of that adverb was leggermente, alternatively, leggiermente. However, as it does not appear in any of the sources, we keep the Chopinesque indication, which, after all, is perfectly clear in terms of its meaning. Cf. a similar situation in the 3rd mov. of the Concerto in F Minor, Op. 21, b. 81 and 317. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 6-15
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 3, Prelude in G major
..
In FCI the identical places in terms of pitch and rhythm were marked differently, which is noteworthy – dim. in b. 6, yet poco cresc. in b. 15, i.e. in an analogous place. The fact that those indications were abandoned in the final version could have been related to the calmer tempo of the Prelude. See also b. 11, 27-30 and 32. category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||
|
b. 11
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 3, Prelude in G major
..
category imprint: Differences between sources |
hairpins under the L.H. semiquavers in 
e leg. in 
in 