mUltimate Chopin

Op. 28 No. 24, Prelude in D minor

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. 41-42

composition: Op. 28 No. 24, Prelude in D minor

    in A (→FE→EE) & contextual interpretation of FC 

   in GE
..

Fontana omitted the  mark at the beginning of b. 41 in FC, leaving a lonely  asterisk at the end of b. 42. GE completed the pedalling; however, in the face of varied L.H. figures in these bars, a separate pedal was added in each of them. The crossing-out of the  mark at the end of b. 41, visible in A, proves that Chopin consciously combined them with pedal. Crossings-out of those marks in similar situations are also present at the end of b. 9, 20 and 54.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Corrections in A , GE revisions , Deletions in A , Errors of FC

b. 42

composition: Op. 28 No. 24, Prelude in D minor

..

In FE the 2nd semiquaver in both figures is an erroneous c note, whereas in EE – most probably as a result of revision of this clearly false version – e. The version of EE, although possible in terms of harmony, is pianistically improbable. In turn, the pencilled correction of c to A written in FES, compliant with the version of A (→FC→GE), may come from Chopin.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Errors in FE , Terzverschreibung error , Annotations in FES

b. 42

composition: Op. 28 No. 24, Prelude in D minor

g in A (→FC,FE →EE)

e in GE, contextual interpretation
..

In GE the 3rd semiquaver in the 2nd half of the bar is an e note, which is a patent mistake in itself; however, if we take into account a possibly overlooked , it constitutes a harmonically plausible version in which we could even see subtlety, so typical of Chopin, since the g seventh is exposed in the R.H. part. Nevertheless, nothing suggests that Chopin could have participated in the development of GE, hence the authenticity of this version cannot be confirmed.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , Terzverschreibung error , Omission of current key accidentals

b. 42

composition: Op. 28 No. 24, Prelude in D minor

..

In A (→FC) there are no flats lowering a1 to a1 and a to a in the R.H. The patent inaccuracy was corrected in FE (→EE) and GE.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals , FE revisions , Inaccuracies in A

b. 43-58

composition: Op. 28 No. 24, Prelude in D minor

..

In each of b. 44-46, 49, 52, 56 and 58, the L.H. part is marked with a •/• in A (→FC), which implies that the preceding bar should be repeated. Moreover, in FC the copyist, contrary to A, marked entire b. 48 in such a way. The abridged notation was used in the manuscripts also in the remaining bars to mark the 2nd half of the bar – b. 43, 47, 48 (only A), 50, 51, 53-55 and 57. Similar notation was also used in FE, where the 2nd half of the bar was marked with a / in b. 43-54 and 57-58.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Source & stylistic information

issues: Abbreviated notation of A , FE revisions , Fontana's revisions