mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Inaccuracies in GE

b. 3

composition: Op. 24 No. 1, Mazurka in G minor

More probably a long accent in A

A short accent in GE

Inaccurate notation of FE

 in EE
..

It is not clear whether the accent written in A was meant to be a short one or a long one. GE (→FE) has a short accent here, and the inaccurate placement of that mark in FE brought about its erroneous interpretation in EE. However, a comparison with the analogous bars 11, 51 and 59 points to the long accent option as being more probable.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , EE inaccuracies

b. 3-4

composition: Op. 10 No 12, Etude in C minor

Slurs in A, literal reading

Slur in FE (→GE,EE) 
..

We present the literal interpretation of the slurs included in A, however, there is no doubt that Chopin considered this notation to be equal to one slur, as in bars 1-2. A similar hesitation, concerning the choice of space for leading the slur, is visible also in bars 41-42.
In GE2 (→GE3→GE4) the end of the slur was moved to the beginning of bar 5, which is a patent error.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccurate slurs in A , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 3

composition: Op. 25 No 1, Etude in A♭ major

No signs in AI & CDP

  in A

  in GE

  in EE

  in FE

Our suggestion
..

Chopin added the dynamic indication in this bar only at the time of preparing the Etude for print. Initially, he provided the f2 note with an accent (as in bar 2), yet eventually he chose a pair of   hairpins. However, the signs are imprecise – the arms of the first one are of different length, while the second seems to be shortened in order to avoid a possible illegible mergence of the sign with the note in the L.H. or the semiquaver beam in the R.H. (GE reproduced it in such a way). In the main text we suggest an interpretation of the hairpins of A based on the above analysis and comparison with FE and EE.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Deletions in A

b. 3

composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II

f1 tied in FE (→EE)

f1 repeated in GE
..

In FE, the f1 tie is printed slightly inaccurately, so that in GE1 (→GE2) it was misinterpreted as a slur for the bottom voice in the R.H. (in GE3, the mark was omitted).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Errors in GE

b. 3

composition: Op. 28 No. 9, Prelude in E major

 in A (→FC,FE→EE)

in GE

in CGS
..

The moved and shorter  hairpin in GE is most probably a mistake of the engraver. There is a similar situation in CGS.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in CGS