mUltimate Chopin

Op. 28 No. 9, 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. 2

composition: Op. 28 No. 9, Prelude in E major

c in A (→FC→GE1, →FE→EE) & CGS

d in $GE2 (→GE3)
..

The version of GE2 is a result of an arbitrary revision, provoked by a mistake committed in GE1 in the next triplet, i.e. a c was printed there instead of a d, which is a patent mistake. While correcting that place the reviser of GE2 probably started thinking that the middle notes of the triplets are to create an octave echo of the melodic notes in this entire fragment (b. 1-3 corresponding in GE to the first line of the text) and changed c to d also in the 2nd triplet. Consequently, none of the impressions of GE includes the correct text in this bar.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions

b. 3

composition: Op. 28 No. 9, Prelude in E major

 in A (→FC,FE→EE)

in GE

in CGS
..

The moved and shorter  hairpin in GE is most probably a mistake of the engraver. There is a similar situation in CGS.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in CGS

b. 3-4

composition: Op. 28 No. 9, Prelude in E major

Slur in A

No slur in FC (→GE), FE (→EE) & CGS
..

The inconspicuous little slur of A was overlooked both in FC (→GE) and FE (→EE). The absence in CGS – see b. 1-9.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Errors of FC

b. 4-5

composition: Op. 28 No. 9, Prelude in E major

Separate slurs in A

Equivocal slurs in FC, literal reading

Continuous slur in FE (→EE), GE & CGS
..

The slurs in A are clearly divided, hence it is unclear what confused the engraver of FE (→EE) and made him not take into consideration that division. The slurring of FC is obscure – the slur in b. 4, at the end of the line, does not suggest a continuation, yet the slur at the beginning of b. 5 clearly does. Consequently, it is also GE that feature a continuous slur here.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Inaccuracies in FC

b. 4

composition: Op. 28 No. 9, Prelude in E major

Fingering written into FES

No teaching fingering
..

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FES