mUltimate Chopin

Op. 28 No. 4, 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
Ornaments
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

Ornaments

b. 11-19

composition: Op. 28 No. 4, Prelude in E minor

..

Both in b. 11 and 19, the grace notes in A (→FE→EE) are non-slashed, whereas in FC (→GE) – slashed. It is an inaccuracy that would often happen to Fontana-copyist, in this case almost certainly contrary to the intention of Chopin. The Chopinesque entries in FED equate the grace note and the crotchet with two quavers, which can be considered one of the performance possibilities of these motifs. We recommend a slightly shorter grace note, which could be written down as .
We give the variants resulting from the above differences of notation in the notes to b. 10-11 and 18-19.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Source & stylistic information

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FED , Non-slashed grace notes , Fontana's revisions

b. 12

composition: Op. 28 No. 4, Prelude in E minor

Grace note written into FEJ

No grace note in remaining sources
..

As a whole, the entry in FEJ is difficult to interpret. The part written on the stave creates a quite distinct, small, slashed f1 or g1 quaver. The context speaks strongly in favour of f1 – a repetition of a note in the form of a grace note, preceding a larger interval upwards (most often an octave), is often to be found in pieces by Chopin, cf., e.g. the Polonaise in E Major, Op. 22, b. 56, Bolero in A Minor, Op. 19, b. 160 or Scherzo in B Minor, Op. 31, b. 302. In such a context, the grace note generally facilitates the performance by enabling a change of finger, in the discussed place of the Prelude from 3 to 1 or 2. The version with the grace note can be considered an equal variant with respect to the main text.

As far as the marks added below the stave are concerned, they can be seen as, e.g. a diagonal cross (often encountered in teaching copies), a very stooped , alternatively a digit '1' (the 1st finger on the added grace note) and a slur. We consider the latter to be most likely, hence we include it in the transcription of the text of FEJ.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Authentic post-publication changes and variants , Annotations in FEJ

b. 16

composition: Op. 28 No. 4, Prelude in E minor

 with [] in As & A (→FC), interpretation

in FE (→EE), GE & CGS
..

The vertical line in the symbol used by Chopin to mark the grupetto indicates that the bottom note of the ornament should be raised (cf. the Nocturne in D Major, Op. 27 No. 2, b. 7). As augmented seconds are not used in grupetti, it is almost certain that Chopin did not mean g1 to be formally altered to g1, but wanted to indicate that the bottom note falls at the interval of a minor, and not major second, which results in g1 as the intended note. FE (→EE) and GE did not reproduce the Chopinesque symbol accurately nor marked that the bottom note should be altered. In the main text we reproduce the Chopinesque notation in a contemporary form.  

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Turn