mUltimate Chopin

Op. 28 No. 10, Prelude in C♯ 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. 1-14

composition: Op. 28 No. 10, Prelude in C♯ minor

Long accents in A, contextual interpretation

& accents in FC (→GE)

 in FE (→EE)
..

The  marks in b. 1-2 and analog. are of different length in A; however, the differences are clearly of an accidental nature, hence we unify them in the main text. At the same time, we give them the form of long accents, taking into account, above all, the graphical factor – it is shorter marks that definitely prevail, which can be considered long accents – and the practical factor – in the Allegro molto tempo, each such a fast succession of short diminuendoes, unless we combine them in one, two-bar long (which would have been certainly written differently), comes down to accents.

The markings in the remaining sources also indicate that attempts were made to unify them, although in the case of FC (→GE), the first two passages are provided with clearly longer marks than the subsequent ones. Those versions can be considered an acceptable interpretation of the notation of A.

Learn more »

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in FE , Inaccuracies in FC

b. 1

composition: Op. 28 No. 10, Prelude in C♯ minor

 in A (literal reading→FE→EE)

Long accent in A, contextual interpretation

in FC (→GE)
..

Actually, the  mark written in A encompasses the entire opening sextuplet. However, some of the subsequent marks, which, according to us, are to be interpreted as long accents regardless of their factual length, are of a similar length, which makes us consider this mark to be a long accent too. Naturally, the literal interpretation may be regarded as an equal variant. The mark in FC (→GE), quite significantly shortened, could have resulted from the copyist's conviction about the need to unify this and the subsequent marks.

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in FC

b. 13

composition: Op. 28 No. 10, Prelude in C♯ minor

Long accent in A (contextual interpretation→FC)

 in FE (→EE)

No mark in GE
..

The issue of interpreting the mark as a long accent – see b. 1-14. The missing mark in GE is most probably an oversight of the engraver.

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

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