Page: 
Source: 
p. 4, b. 89-123
p. 1, b. 1-28
p. 2, b. 29-56
p. 3, b. 57-88
p. 4, b. 89-123
p. 5, b. 124-164
p. 6, b. 165-200
p. 7, b. 201-234
p. 8, b. 235-260
p. 9, b. 261-289
Main text
Main text
FE - French edition
FE0 -
FE1 - First French edition
FED - Dubois copy
FEJ - Jędrzejewicz copy
GE - German edition
FEG - Chopin's Stichvorlage for GE
GE1 - First German edition
GE2 - Second German edition
GE3 - Corrected impression of GE2
EE - English edition
EE1 - First English edition
Select notes: 
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
Differences
No differences
FE - French edition
FE0 -
FE1 - First French edition
FED - Dubois copy
FEJ - Jędrzejewicz copy
GE - German edition
FEG - Chopin's Stichvorlage for GE
GE1 - First German edition
GE2 - Second German edition
GE3 - Corrected impression of GE2
EE - English edition
EE1 - First English edition
Importance
All
Important
Main
Prezentacja
Select 
copy link PDF Main text


  b. 92

It seems that the second half of the R.H. in this bar was not printed in FE0. It may be a consequence of earlier rhythmic errors (see the previous note). The photocopy of FEG we have at our disposal does not let us state clearly which elements of the score were printed. Chopin certainly added a beam combining two quavers with a semiquaver, a semiquaver rest and a beam for the last semiquaver. Taking into account the rhythmic synchronisation of the hands, in FE0 could already have a quaver on the 2nd beat (misprinted in this place or possibly inaccurately added by Chopin in FEG) and the last semiquaver.

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE

notation: Pitch

Missing markers on sources: FE0, FE1, FED, FEJ, GE2