mUltimate Chopin

Op. 28 No. 9, Prelude in E major

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Errors of FC

b. 2

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

2 slurs in A (→FE→EE) & CGS

Continuous slur in FC (→GE)
..

Fontana's mistake in the interpretation of the slurs of A could have been caused by a slur from the next page of A clearly showing through the paper – a fragment of a slur of the Prelude in C Minor seems to combine the two slurs of A in this place.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors of FC

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. 5-12

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

Slur in bars 5-12 in A (→FE→EE)

Slur in bars 5-8 in FC

Slurs in bars 5-6 & 7-8 in GE

Slur in bars 10-12 in CGS
..

The slur, encompassing the entire L.H. part in these bars, was reproduced incompletely in some sources, while GE reproduced it inaccurately:

  • In FC Fontana overlooked the ending of the slur in the last line of his copy (b. 9-12). Although the slur of FC suggests a continuation at the end of b. 8, GE considered it an inaccuracy and led the slur only to B1 in that bar.
  • Moreover, in GE the issue of combining the slurs in b. 6-7 remains unclear – the slur in b. 6, at the end of the line, may suggest a continuation, which is not confirmed by the slur in b. 7. We assume that they are divided slurs.
  • In CGS the first L.H. slur appears only just in b. 10-12. The beginning of that slur, suggesting a continuation from the previous bar, proves a serious inadvertence of the copyist.

A slur compliant with the notation of A is to be found in FE (→EE) only. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Errors of FC , Errors in CGS

b. 11

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

 in A, contextual interpretation

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

Like in the previous two bars, we assume the bottom arm of the  hairpin in A to be reliable. The mark is absent in all the remaining sources, which is almost certainly a result of oversights:

  • A few overlooked elements prove that Fontana was distracted at the time of writing the last line of FC – in addition to , it is also the L.H. slur and dashes marking the range of crescendo that are missing.
  • While working on the last line, the engraver of FE probably omitted the stage of adding dynamic markings, since the  hairpin is neither in b. 10 nor in b. 11.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , Errors of FC , Inaccuracies in A

b. 11

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

Dashes in A (→FE→EE)

No dashes in FC (→GE)

Dashes in CGS
..

The missing dashes marking the range of cresc. must be an oversight of Fontana in FC (→GE). In CGS the dashes reach only the middle of the bar, which is one of many minor inaccuracies of that copy.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors of FC , Inaccuracies in CGS