mUltimate Chopin

Op. 28 No. 19, Prelude in E♭ major

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

b. 1

composition: Op. 28 No. 19, Prelude in E♭ major

e1 in A (→FC→GE1, →FE→EE)

g1 in GE2 (→GE3)
..

The change of the 3rd quaver of the bar from e1 to g1, introduced in GE2 (→GE3), most probably originated from analogous b. 9, in which g1 is present in all sources. There is no question that g1 is more natural here from the pianistic point of view as well as more logical in terms of the structure of figurations. Therefore, did Chopin actually commit a Terzverschreibung mistake right at the beginning of a piece? An important argument against that hypothesis is a similar differentiation between b. 1 and 9 in the Etude in E Major, Op. 10 No. 11 (in the Etude, the notation rules out a mistake, since it would have had to encompass 5 chords). In both cases, it was a combination with the preceding figure (in b. 8-9) or its absence (in b. 1) that could have been the reason for the differentiation. Taking into account the above, in the main text we leave the version of A. A similar situation can be found in b. 33.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Terzverschreibung error , GE revisions

b. 1-10

composition: Op. 28 No. 19, Prelude in E♭ major

..

In A (→FC) these bars are numbered for an easier identification while implementing the abridged notation of b. 33-42 as a repetition of b. 1-10.

category imprint: Source & stylistic information

issues: Abbreviated notation of A

b. 1-8

composition: Op. 28 No. 19, Prelude in E♭ major

..

In A one can see crossed-out three-quaver slurs running from the 2nd quaver of each triplet to the 1st quaver of the next one. One can assume that the crossing-out was related to the legato indication added at the beginning of the Prelude. At the beginning of the Etude in A Major, Op. 10 No. 10, we can see an evolution of notation that was perhaps going in a similar direction; in that Etude, Chopin removed the initial accents while proofreading the French edition.

category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Corrections in A , Deletions in A

b. 2

composition: Op. 28 No. 19, Prelude in E♭ major

e2 in A (→FC,FE→EE) & GE2 (→GE3)

g2 in GE1
..

The engraver of GE1 did not notice (considered it a mistake?) that the first two notes of the last triplet do not constitute the interval of an octave, unlike in the previous ones. The mistake was corrected in GE2 (→GE3).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , Terzverschreibung error , GE revisions

b. 3-11

composition: Op. 28 No. 19, Prelude in E♭ major

..

In A (→FC,FE), there are no naturals raising b to b in b. 3 and 11. Similar inaccuracies in the notation of notes separated by an octave are often to be found in the Preludes; in this one and in some others, they are even a rule – cf. e.g. the Prelude in F Minor No. 8, b. 1-4. The accidentals were added in GE and EE.
Similarly in b. 35.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , GE revisions , Inaccuracies in A , Errors repeated in FE