mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Uncertain notes on ledger lines

b. 48

composition: Op. 64 No 2, Waltz in C♯ minor

Triad in As

Sixth in AI & A (→FE→GE,EE)
..

The sound of the 2nd crotchet in As is not certain. We assume that it is a g-c1-e1 chord. Similarly in all repetitions of this place, which in As (and in AI) are not written out with notes (bars 64, 112 and 128).

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Uncertain notes on ledger lines

b. 49

composition: Op. 10 No 11, Etude in E♭ major

Chord with c1 in A

No c1 in chord in FE (→GE,EE)
..

Lack of c1 in the 5th chord is most probably a result of an oversight of the engraver of FE (→GE,EE). Although in FE there are visible traces of corrections in this chord, yet the a note was deleted, probably printed by mistake instead of f. In the main text we give the unequivocal version of A, compliant with analogous bar 48.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Errors resulting from corrections , Terzverschreibung error , Uncertain notes on ledger lines

b. 57

composition: Op. 63 No. 3, Mazurka in C# minor

g-c1-e in FE (→EEW)

No c1 in GE
..

The missing c1 notes in GE is probably an oversight by the engraver of FE, repeated after the proof copy of FE1, in the finished FE1 corrected by Chopin in the last stage of proofreading. Such a mistake is much more likely when reading a Chopinesque autograph than a printed version – cf., e.g. the Etude in G, Op. 10 No. 5, bar 15, the Etude in E, Op. 10 No. 11, bar 43 or the Concerto in F minor, Op. 21, II mov., bar 41.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Errors in GE , Authentic corrections of FE , Uncertain notes on ledger lines

b. 64

composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major

a-c1-a1 in JC

a-f1 in EF

a-c1-f1 in PE
..

a1 as the highest note of the chord is most probably an error of JC; it is revealed by f1 which is featured both in EF and PE. Analogously, the compatible presence of the c1 note in this chord in JC and PE leads to a conclusion that its omission is probably an error of EF. In the main text we give the version of PE, which does not raise any doubts.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Terzverschreibung error , Uncertain notes on ledger lines , Errors of JC , Errors in Fontana's editions

b. 73

composition: Op. 25 No 5, Etude in E minor

No c1 in chord in FC (→GE) & EE

c1 in chord in FE
..

The version without c1 in the last chord is probably a result of misinterpretation of [A]. There is no reason, neither sound nor piano, which would justify the distortion of regularity of the harmonic progression in this place. Moreover, the slurs over the pairs of chords in bars 73-76 also prove a slightly more accurate development of the text of FE in this fragment.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Uncertain notes on ledger lines