mUltimate Chopin

Op. 28 No. 8, Prelude in F♯ minor

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. 1-2

composition: Op. 28 No. 8, Prelude in F♯ minor

Long accents in A (→FC), contextual interpretation

4 short accents in FE

No marks in GE 

3 vertical accents in EE
..

The long accents written in A (→FC) were not reproduced correctly in any of the editions. Both the shorter marks in FE and their omission in GE could have been related to a very dense and not always rational vertical text layout. The change of the accents' font in EE is a revision, typical of that edition, while the omission of the third mark – an oversight.
In the main text we also include – unlike FE – the accents in b. 2, marked in the manuscripts as a repetition of b. 1. This issue is generally ambiguous, e.g. tempo/character indications are certainly not to be repeated, but slurs and pedalling marks continued in the next bars should definitely be repeated. In the case of accents, both possibilities are actually equivalent in this context – the marks are given here as a pattern and should be applied also in the next bars, hence the number of explicitly given accents (4 or 8) is insignificant (cf., e.g. the accents at the beginning of the Prelude No. 6 in B Minor or the Etude in C Major, Op. 10 No. 1). 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , Errors in EE , Errors in GE

b. 12

composition: Op. 28 No. 8, Prelude in F♯ minor

in A (→FE→EE)

No sign in FC (→GE)
..

The lack of the  hairpin in FC (→GE) is Fontana's error.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors of FC

b. 14

composition: Op. 28 No. 8, Prelude in F♯ minor

in A (→FC→GE)

in FE (→EE)
..

The later starting point of the  hairpin in FE (→EE) is an inaccuracy, perhaps caused by lack of space between the staves.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE

b. 25-26

composition: Op. 28 No. 8, Prelude in F♯ minor

6 long accents in A (→FC)

8 short accents in FE

8 different accents in GE

8 short R.H. accents in EE
..

As a result of narrow spaces between the staves, in A it is uncertain which part the 6 long accents written there are supposed to concern. It also leads to doubts about their number – the marks applying to the R.H. part could be included in the range of the repeat signs used to mark the 2nd and 4th groups of demisemiquavers. This is how it was interpreted in all editions, where 8 marks were printed. According to us, the 6 (and not 8) accents are certainly supposed to emphasize the tenor voice, constituted by the topmost notes, marked with accents, of the L.H. figures. The change of all or some accents to short ones is a frequent arbitrary intervention of Chopinesque first editions.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE

b. 28

composition: Op. 28 No. 8, Prelude in F♯ minor

  in A (→FE→EE)

No signs in FC (→GE)
..

The missing dynamic hairpins in FC (→GE) are a patent oversight of the copyist.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors of FC