mUltimate Chopin

Op. 28 No. 6, Prelude in B minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : GE revisions

b. 1-2

composition: Op. 28 No. 6, Prelude in B minor

  in A (contextual interpretation→FC)

  in FE (→EE)

  in GE

No markings in CGS
..

The range of the  hairpin in b. 1 is difficult to determine in A – the top arm is much shorter than the bottom one. According to us, it is the range marked by the top arm, written first, that was intended by Chopin. It is compliant with dynamics, naturally resulting from the shape of the melodic line, and this is how it was reproduced by Fontana in FC (→GE). That interpretation is also supported by the range of the  hairpins in analog. b. 3 and 9 (as well as 23), in which the range of the top arm remains unchanged, unlike the considerable and rather accidental changeability of the bottom one. The differences in the length of the  mark in b. 2 seem to be inaccuracies (in FC, not affecting the meaning) or routine revisions (in editions).

CGS overlooked the vast majority of dynamic markings – except for two  in b. 13-14. According to us, it is an oversight of the copyist.

Similar problems and differences occur in following, similar bars 3-5, 9-11 and 23-24.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions , Inaccuracies in A

b. 3-4

composition: Op. 28 No. 6, Prelude in B minor

  in A, contextual interpretation

  in A (possible interpretation→FC)

  in FE (→EE)

  in GE

No markings in CGS
..

As was the case with b. 1-2, we consider the top arm of the  hairpin in A to be reliable. In all the remaining sources (except for CGS, in which the marks were overlooked), it was the range of the bottom arm that was taken into account. In the editions, both marks were extended or moved, most probably after their own, general editorial principles.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions , Inaccuracies in A

b. 12-14

composition: Op. 28 No. 6, Prelude in B minor

No accidentals in A (→FC→GE1)

Naturals in FE (→EE), GE2 (→GE3) & CGS
..

The version of A (→FC→GE1), in which these three bars are based on the c-e-g diminished chord, most probably resulted from an oversight of the naturals lowering c to c (in various octaves) by Chopin. The correctness of the version of FE (→EE) is mainly evidenced by three teaching copies bearing clear traces of having been developed with Chopin, in which the C major chord as the harmonic basis of those bars was not questioned; it is also evidenced by CGS, which was written by a person who was both close to Chopin and a witness to the creative process of the cycle of Preludes. The naturals visible in FC are an addition by H. Scholtz, coming from the 1870s. The change introduced in GE2 could have been drawn from FE or a result of an accurate analysis of the harmonic structure of the piece by the reviser.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Foreign hand additions in manuscripts , Omission of current key accidentals , Errors of A , FE revisions , Last key signature sign

b. 15

composition: Op. 28 No. 6, Prelude in B minor

..

The  raising a1 to a1 is erroneously placed before g1. The mistake was rectified in GE2 (→GE3).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions