Issues : Partial corrections
|
b. 98
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
An additional c2 note could have been added by Chopin in the proofreading of GE1 (→FE→EE). The melodic line of the accompaniment, where the second quaver of each pair is higher than the previous dyad or chord, suggests that the note was probably to be sustained, which was then performed in the proofreading of FE (→EE). It cannot be excluded that the additional c2 was printed in GE1 by mistake and left unnecessarily after having added the correct note, a In the main text we give the version of FE as intended or accepted by Chopin. The version of A may be considered an equal variant, whereas the version of GE1 is almost certainly erroneous. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , Terzverschreibung error , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE , Authentic corrections of GE , Partial corrections |
|||||||||||||
|
b. 102
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt I
..
The staccato dots probably represent the initial version of articulation of these crotchets, which Chopin replaced with slurs. It is indicated by the A notation in bar 104, in which the dots over the 2nd and 3rd crotchet were overwritten with a slur (leaving the dot over the 4th crotchet must be considered an oversight in this situation). In the discussed bar all 3 dots present along with slurs remained unremoved, hence in the main text we provide them in a variant form (in brackets). Being convinced of our hypothesis, one can choose the version of the editions, devoid of these dots. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Partial corrections |
|||||||||||||
|
b. 106-107
|
composition: Op. 23, Ballade in G minor
..
The change of slurring in these and the next bars must be coming from Chopin. According to us, the aim was to replace the shorter slurs of A with longer ones, which, however, was marked or implemented inaccurately in the discussed bars, hence the second of the original slurs (supposed to be removed) was left untouched. A similar phenomenon is to be found in, e.g. the Concerto in E minor, Op. 11, III mov., b. 179-181. In Chopin's autographs, one can find numerous examples for prolonging or combining initially written shorter slurs, e.g. in b. 112-114 of the Ballade, in the Mazurka in A category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions |
|||||||||||||
|
b. 134-136
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
In b. 134 and 136, the Chopinesque manner of writing stems always on the right-hand side of the noteheads contributed to an incomprehensible reproduction of the two-part notation of AF by the engraver of FE and, consequently, the totally erroneous notation of EE. In the main text we give the simplest and probably the latest notation introduced by Chopin in [AG] (→GE). category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , Corrections in A , Errors resulting from corrections , FE revisions , Inaccuracies in A , Partial corrections |
|||||||||||||
|
b. 169
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
According to us, neither source nor stylistic criteria allow us to give preference to any of these versions. Due to the above reason, in the main text we suggest a variant solution. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , Authentic corrections of FE , Partial corrections |
1 (a Terzverschreibung error). The tie of this note, added in the proofreading of 
