mUltimate Chopin

Op. 28 No. 15, Prelude in D♭ major

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. 86

composition: Op. 28 No. 15, Prelude in D♭ major

Long accent in A

No sign in FC (→GE)

 in FE (→EE)
..

The missing accent in FC (→GE) resulted from the copyist's distraction – see the note on b. 83. The mark in FE (→EE), placed at the level of the  hairpin in the preceding bar, resembles a  hairpin, although it is only slightly longer than in A.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Errors of FC

b. 87

composition: Op. 28 No. 15, Prelude in D♭ major

Accent in A, interpretation

No mark in FC (→GE) & FE (→EE)
..

The Chopinesque manner of writing semibreves in the middle of the bar, now almost completely abandoned (cf. General Editorial Principles, p. 24), was used in this bar to indicate that the accent refers to e1, which, therefore, belongs to the bottom, melodic voice of the R.H. Semibreves are written down in this way in A (→FC,FE) in the entire ending (b. 84-89), which, in this case, we reproduce in the graphical transcription as an exception (the version "transcription"). However, the accent was not reproduced in any other source – Fontana overlooked all dynamic indications in b. 83-87, while in FE all 3 notes of the chord in the discussed bar were written in the middle of the bar, which impeded the accent to be placed in accordance with Chopin's intention. 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Source & stylistic information

issues: Long accents , Errors in FE , Errors of FC