Chopin – Prelude in G Major, Op. 28 No. 3

The following concerns the collection of Opus 28 Preludes as a whole… This information is the same for any of the reference pages concerning the opus.

From “preluding” to “prelude”: Before Chopin’s Op. 28 Preludes hit the scene, a composition titled “prelude” was meant to mimic the improvisatory “preluding” that many pianists did when first sitting down to perform. If this concept is unfamiliar to you, watch the start of this video from the first Chopin Competition on Period Instruments. There’s “preluding” in the first thirty seconds of the video before the etude begins. The preludes of Chopin’s Op. 28 transcended this realm and entered the domain of compositionally-interesting, self-contained works.

Getting Organized!  Chopin wrote these preludes between 1835 and their publication in 1839. This included the 1838-39 winter where he was relaxing in Valldemosa, Majorca with George Sand and her children.  It’s still a great vacation spot and now has a “Museum of Chopin and George Sand.” Like any good traveler, Chopin remembered to take  his copy of Bach’s The Well-Tempered Clavier with him. Did this influence the structure of his preludes? An obvious point related to the first prelude specifically is that both Chopin and Bach start their collections with a prelude consisting of broken arpeggios. More importantly, many point out the obvious connection that both collections consist of pieces in each major and minor key.  (Bach organized these by rising semitone while Chopin organized them in a circle of fifths). Some argue that Chopin’s arrangement is conducive to a performance of the entire Op. 28 as a whole, which might have been Chopin’s intent (Alfred Cortot was the first to do this in 1926). Others point out (like Marilyn Meier in her dissertation) that Chopin himself never played more than four in any given sitting.

Better than Kessler! The manuscript of Chopin’s preludes shows a dedication to Joseph Christoph Kessler, which probably contradicts the dedication seen in the edition you’re using.  Kessler wrote 24 preludes of his own in 1831 (Op. 31). Maybe one shouldn’t make too much of the Bach connection above considering that Chopin may have simply been trying to one-up Kessler with a collection of his own!  Although Kessler remained the dedicatee of the first German edition, the primary dedicatee of his Op. 28 was changed to Camille Pleyel because…well…money talks!

The Man With the Cash! Camille Pleyel was a major piano entrepreneur of his time.  He could play, he published music, he ran a concert hall, he owned a firm that manufactured pianos…which explains why he could not only afford to commission Chopin’s Op. 28 preludes for 2,000 francs ^[1]Page 213 of Huneker’s Chopin Biography but also give him a piano for his writing! As the preludes were finished, a lot of historical documentation revolved around Pleyel.  Two letters exist from January 22, 1839…  The first to Julian Fontana where Chopin says that Fontana will soon be receiving the preludes and is to copy them with “Wolff,” give one of these copies to “Probst,” and send the manuscript to Pleyel.  The second letter to Pleyel himself says that Pleyel would receive the preludes from Fontana and that they were completed using Pleyel’s piano…a piano remaining undamaged during shipping, despite the sea, bad weather and the Parma customs office (some Chopin humor). And finally, a later letter to Fontana exists from March 1839 changing the Op. 28 dedicatee to Pleyel on the condition that Pleyel will “agree to leave out the Ballade.” If not, the dedication should be changed to Schumann.

What Others Thought: Schumann was surprised, initially expecting pieces “in the grand style of his studies” but finding “sketches, the beginning of studies, or, if you will, ruins, eagle’s feathers, all strangely intermingled”…but all distinctively Chopin.  Liszt said they were characterized by a youthful vigor that was lacking in some of his later works ^[2]Quotes on Pages 120-121 of Huneker’s Chopin Biography.

What to Look for in Good Editions…Ekier International Edition: The clear leader in terms of accuracy, research, and reputation in publications of Chopin’s piano music is the Ekier International Edition.  Edited by Jan Ekier and Paweł Kamiński, it has financial backing from the Fryderyk Chopin Institute.  It is recommended in the instructional material for pianists preparing for the International Chopin Competition. If one is arguing against this edition, they’ll feel foolish after seeing the back matter where the research process and manuscripts studied for each prelude are listed.  Other editions may be recommended as a first-choice by some who are simply not aware of this latest project.

Trivia and Concerns About Other Editions: 

• As early editions became further removed from the original source, the cut time marking began to be replaced by a common time marking.  The cut time is correct.  Be sure you’re not using a score like the 1879 Peters Plate 6206 on IMSLP or others that show the common time marking.
• Another item to watch out for is that some editions tie the right-hand E and G in measure 22 into the next measure.  This can be seen in the Mikuli edition printed by Dover, for example. There is no basis for these ties.
• If one knows the early history of the publication of the Op. 28 Preludes, they are aware that there was an autograph that Chopin edited himself. This was used as the basis of the first French edition. A copy of this same autograph was made by Julian Fontana. It is this copy that was used as the basis of the first German edition.  This Fontana score does contain some errors made during copying.  One of these errors is present in this G Major prelude.  In the Fontana copy, the second half of bar 17 in the right hand was written as a dotted eighth and sixteenth (yep, that’s right, it’s missing a sixteenth of time)!  Fontana then corrected this to a double-dotted eighth followed by a sixteenth.  This was at least mathematically correct, but still not a correct reproduction of Chopin’s autograph! This error can still be seen in the Mikuli edition mentioned above!
• Finally, be on the lookout for an erroneous crescendo in bar thirty-one!  The Ekier edition posits that this might have been Chopin’s original intention and was later changed by him in his autograph to a dimuendo since the crescendo seems to have survived from the Fontana copy into early German editions.  Go to IMSLP and look at the first German edition (Breitkopf & Härtel Plate 6088) or the Kullak-edited Plate S. 7287 to see this oddity!

And the left hand is off and running…: Many developing pianists begin the preludes, feel a sense of accomplishment after the first two, and then hit a roadblock due to the speed of the left hand in the G Major Prelude. Despite this, the prelude fits very well into the hand and doesn’t pose many technical challenges.  But interpretive decisions abound!  How crisp should the left hand be played in lieu of the leggieramente marking?  How do you take this into consideration while obeying the slur appearing one per measure?  Chopin didn’t indicate any pedaling at all in this prelude…how much should the performer use?

Pedaling: As you might have seen in the above section, the Ekier Edition is recommended, and this edition recommends pedal at the start of the bar with a gradual release about halfway through.  Naturally, this will depend on the goal of the performer and acoustic environment.  Ultimately, a middle ground is recommended with just enough pedal to assist in shaping the left hand but not enough that the leggieramente is affected.

Fingering: Fingering throughout the work is pretty much self-evident.  And not many fingerings can be traced back to Chopin (those that can include a “2, 1” in the right hand starting measure twenty-eight as well as a “2, 3, 4, 1, 2” etc. in the right hand, second beat of measure thirty-one).  One useful fingering suggestion not offered by the Ekier edition concerns measure seven and the highest F#-E that appears there in the left hand. The Ekier International Edition gives two options. First, a 1-2 meaning that the thumb plays the F#.  Although this keeps the pattern consistent, it can feel awkward.  Secondly, a 1-1, or quick slide from black key to white.  Other editions suggest a 2 on the F# followed by the thumb on the E.  This is certainly worth a try and will probably be the fingering of choice depending on hand size of the performer.

Minor Points: The rolled, right-hand chords in measures 8, 10, 18, and 24 begin in conjunction with the initial note of the left hand allowing the roll to expand later in the measure.  This should be self-evident.

Nicknames: Many of the nicknames for the Chopin preludes come from descriptions by the pianist Hans von Bülow.  His descriptor for the G Major Prelude is “Thou art so like a flower.”  Cortot developed his own set of descriptors and calls this prelude “Le chant de ruisseau” meaning “the song of the stream.”

One feature shared by all the recommended recordings is a right-hand melody that is voiced clearly above the left-hand undulations.  This is essential to even a mildly successful interpretation.

1. Evgeny Kissin – (YouTube, Amazon) – Although his left-hand is wonderful, nearly rivaling Sokolov below, his right-hand is so well-shaped!  Listen to the diminuendo in measure five and six.  Listen how the melody F# in measure seven fades away into the following sixteenth-note E with barely a bump in the sound.  Recommended for the great care in the right hand line (in a situation where too many pianists put too much focus on the busy left hand).

2. Artur Rubinstein – (YouTube, Amazon) – It is often heard that earlier generations of pianists had more freedom in interpretation.  A small example of this might be the cascading, nearly blurring, effect of the left hand throughout this performance.  One hears it start strongly after the first few measures, but it certainly continues throughout measures 28-31 as well.  Listen to beat three of measure twenty-nine.  Did you hear it?  Went so fast…

3. Grigory Sokolov – (YouTube, Amazon) – An amazing middle ground between clarity and pedaling in the left hand. Every note is distinct and lively while a touch of pedal is used for shading.  The melody sings above the accompaniment at all times.  Also of note is the subtle set-up of the return of the main material in measure twelve as well as the bubbly leggiero initiated at measure twenty-eight (although if you believe the entrance of the right hand at twenty-eight should be subtle and match the left hand exactly, this interpretation may be too bold in these final measures for your taste).

4. Daniil Trifonov – (YouTube, Amazon) – One of the fastest performances of note.  The left hand is lively and clear with good character, but seems to be at a dynamic level greater than the right hand.  Compare to Sokolov above to hear.  Also, the tempo is inconsistent…compare measures 1-3 with 18-20 and then listen to the hastening toward the end at measure twenty-seven.  Of course, there are musically valid reasons for the freedom and improvisatory quality he is capturing.  Also, a very minor point…the diminuendo in measure thirty-one is a psuedo-dimuendo with the first beat restrained in volume to create the impression of a diminuendo, but the latter three beats remaining stagnant if not getting louder.  Nevertheless, one can’t deny being drawn in to the exciting start of this performance.