mUltimate Chopin

Op. 28 No. 20, Prelude in C minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Inaccurate slurs in A

b. 2-3

composition: Op. 28 No. 20, Prelude in C minor

Slur to bar 3 in A & CGS (literal reading)

Slur in bar 2, contextual interpretations of A (→FC→GE, →FE→EE) & CGS, slur in AB & ACh
..

When interpreted literally, the slur of A reaches the 1st chord in b. 3; however, neither FC (→GE) nor FE (→EE) interpreted it so. A whole-bar slur is also in AB and probably ACh (see the characterization of that autograph). A similar ambiguity concerning the range of that slur is to be found in CGS too. In the main text we give a slur reaching the last crotchet in b. 2, taking into account numerous examples of similar situations in which the inaccuracy of slurs written by Chopin is unquestionable – cf., e.g. the Prelude No. 21 in B, b. 13 and 31 or 38.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A

b. 3

composition: Op. 28 No. 20, Prelude in C minor

Continuous slur in A (→FC→GE, →FE→EE) & ACh

2 slurs from 1st beat in AB

2 slurs from 2nd beat in CGS
..

The slurs of CGS in these bars are most probably doubly inaccurate, both in terms of their number and range. AB also has two slurs, and we consider that the slur in b. 3 encompasses the entire bar (Chopin probably ran out of ink). In turn, in all the sources related to the publication of the Prelude, those bars are encompassed with one slur; the same applies to ACh (we assume that the slur intentionally reaches the end of b. 4 – see the characterization of ACh).  

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A

b. 4-5

composition: Op. 28 No. 20, Prelude in C minor

Continuous slur in A (literal reading→FE→EE) & CGS

Separate slurs in A (contextual interpretation→FC→GE), AB & ACh
..

The slurs of A between b. 4 and 5 are ambiguous – the slur in b. 4, which ends the line, clearly suggests continuation, which is not confirmed by the slur in b. 5. The four-bar structure of the Prelude, emphasized by the change of register and dynamics, makes us consider the ending of the slur in b. 4 to be inaccurate, which is confirmed by the notation of both later album autographs.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , Uncertain slur continuation

b. 5-13

composition: Op. 28 No. 20, Prelude in C minor

Slurs to C1-C in A (→FC→GE, →FE→EE)

Slurs from 1st beat to C1-C & final chord (after AB)

Slurs from 2nd beat to C1-C & final chord in ACh, literal reading

Slurs from 2nd beat to C1-C in ACh, contextual interpretation

No slurs in CGS
..

In the main text we give the unequivocal phrase marks of A and the remaining sources stemming from it. The later autographs – AB and ACh – convey variants that do not seem to be simply inaccuracies of notation. As regards the longer phrase mark of AB – placed in the original in bars 5-9 of the 9-bar version of the Prelude – we admit it to the basic, 13-bar version as a variant of the slur in bars 9-13.
The phrase marks of ACh underline the beginning of the bass passus duriusculus; they also constitute the latest authentic variant concerning phrase marks in these bars. The ending of the phrase mark in b. 9-12 reaches b. 13, which, according to us, is an inaccuracy; however, when interpreted literally, it results in a variant combining both authentic versions of phrase marks.
The missing phrase marks in CGS must be one of numerous defects of that copy.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , Errors in CGS