mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Inaccuracies in GE

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. 322

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

Slur from first quaver in A

Slur from beginning of bar in GE & FE (→EE)
..

In A the starting point of the slur encompassing the final passage is not clearly defined. The tip of the slur is between the 1st and the 2nd triplet quavers and is quite high above the notes (above the shorter slur of the separated voice), hence it cannot be said which quaver it concerns. These factors could have made the engraver of GE (who considered this version of notation inaccurate on a larger scale) lead this slur from the 1st note in the bar. The origin of the longer FE slur could be similar, yet other scenarios are likely as well – in this edition the second slur in this bar is missing, hence the copyist (or the engraver) could have assumed that the overlapping A slurs are an inaccurately written down extension to the slur. According to us, the A slur is supposed to run from the 1st triplet quaver assigned to both hands (e), from which the characteristic 6-note motif being the basis for the entire passage begins (cf. bars 188-195). We provide this interpretation of the A notation in the main text.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Inaccurate slurs in A

b. 323

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

Longer  in AsI

 in A, literal reading

 in A, contextual interpretation

 in GE (→FE,EE)
..

The position of the  marks in A is not homogeneous as part of the recurring ,  and  set. According to us, these small differences result from inaccuracy of notation, since it is unlikely that such precise indications were supposed to additionally suggest some elusive performance differences. Due to the above, in the main text we standardise them:

  • we place  inside the  hairpin, as Chopin did it the second time,
  • we average out the position of  with respect to the notes – when interpreted literally, the first time it falls under the 2nd semiquaver of the triplet, while the second time – under the first one.

In GE (→FE,EE) the combination of a  with a  was reproduced with minor deviations – the first  was moved under the 3rd note of the triplet, while the second  was shortened, so that it did not intersect .

One  mark in AsI is the first attempt to write dynamic markings in this bar.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Inaccuracies in GE

b. 324

composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt IV

in A

 in GE (→FE,IE) & EE2

No sign in EE1
..

In the main text we provide a  after A. In GE (→FE,IE) the mark was slightly moved and extended. The absence of the mark in EE1 is due to an oversight, corrected in EE2.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Errors in EE

b. 326

composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III

Slur over quavers in A & GE2

Slur from crotchet in GE1 (→FE→EE)
..

Adjusting slurs to bars is a characteristic manner of the engraver of GE1. The version of A was restored in GE2.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions

b. 327-329

composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III

Wedges in A

Dots in GE

Dot in bar 329 in FE (→EE)
..

The wedges in bars 327 and 329 were reproduced in GE (→FE→EE) as dots; at the same time, the sign in bar 327 was overlooked in FE (→EE), perhaps due to the erroneous slur.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Inaccuracies in GE , Wedges