mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Uncertain notes on ledger lines

b. 127-129

composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor

c1 only in chord in b. 128 in FC

4 notes c1 in chords in FE (→EE) & GE2

No c1 in chords in GE1
..

The three-note chords present in FE (→EE) are much more likely here, since they prepare and open the chordal sequence in bars 129-132. The FC version almost certainly resulted from the copyist's carelessness, who did not take care of the visibility of the notes written on the ledger line. This is indicated by the notation of the first two chords in bar 129, in which it is also the e1 notes that are practically imperceptible, although their presence is unquestionable. In GE1 it was also c1 in bar 128 that was overlooked, in spite of the presence of this note having been marked in FC. The notes overlooked in GE1 were added in GE2, perhaps on the basis of a comparison with FE.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Uncertain notes on ledger lines , Errors of FC

b. 132

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

a-e1 fifth in GE

Triad with c1 in FE (→EE)
..

According to us, the version of FE (→EE) most probably resulted from a misinterpretation of the manuscript – in Chopin's and Fontana's manuscripts it can be difficult to determine whether a chord contains a middle note on a ledger line – cf., e.g. the Etude in A major, Op. 10 No. 10, b. 76, the Prelude in C major, Op. 28 No. 1, b. 34 or the Concerto in F minor, Op. 21, mov. I, b. 109. Repeating two notes of the preceding chord on the 3rd crotchet would be an unnecessary burden to the accompaniment; it does not occur in this section, as a result of which in the main text we follow GE. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Uncertain notes on ledger lines

b. 140

composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt II

No c1 in GC & FE (→EE1)

c1 in GE & EE2
..

The absence of the c1 note is most probably a result of the unclear notation of [A]. It is indicated by the comparison with analogous bars 138, 178 and 180. The note was added – most probably on the basis of such a comparison – in GE, which was then repeated in EE2. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions , Uncertain notes on ledger lines , Errors of GC

b. 174

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

Four-note chord in A

Three-note chord in GE (→FE→EE)
..

The absence of the c1 note in the editions is certainly a result of an oversight of the engraver of GE1. Although in A the note is slightly less clear than e1, its presence is unquestionable. In similar contexts, Chopin would generally use an arpeggio of the full four-note chord, cf. e.g. the Concerto in E minor, Op. 11, 1st mov., bars 210, 219 and 570, the Ballade in G minor, Op. 23, bar 124, the Scherzo in B minor, Op. 31, bar 470.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , Uncertain notes on ledger lines

b. 191

composition: Op. 38, Ballade in F major

Triad in A (→FE,GC→GE)

Sixth in EE
..

In A the inner note of the last chord in the L.H. is barely visible, therefore, in EE it was omitted.
In GC a four-note chord with d was originally written at this place. This indicates that the copyist mistakenly wrote the chord from bar 195.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Source & stylistic information

issues: Uncertain notes on ledger lines , Alterations in GC