mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description
Select: 
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
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

b. 3

composition: Op. 24 No. 3, Mazurka in A♭ major

 The L.H. rhythm in AI

 A (→GE→FE→EE)
..

On the 1st beat in the L.H., AI has even quavers, as in bar 1.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

b. 3-7

composition: Op. 24 No. 3, Mazurka in A♭ major

..

In AI there is no slur in the L.H. part in bars 3 & 7. In the editors' opinion it is just an economical notation, for a corresponding slur is to be found in bar 1, which contains the same notes and rhythm as in the discussed bars. In the main text we give slurs found in A (→GE→FE→EE). Similarly in bars 27 & 31.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

b. 3-8

composition: Op. 24 No. 3, Mazurka in A♭ major

AI and A (→GE1→FE→EE)

Additional "voice" in GE2
..

In bars 3-4 & 7-8 in GE2 the crotchets e and A were notated as if each of them belonged to two parts. This kind of pedant revision, justified in an orchestral score, is a needless complication in piano music performed by one person. A similar situation occurs in bars 25-28 & 31-32.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions

b. 3-8

composition: Op. 24 No. 3, Mazurka in A♭ major

 and accents in A

GE (→FE→EE)

Accents in AI
..

We reproduce the   signs in bars 3-4 and 7-8 in the main text according to A. In bars 7-8 in GE (→FE→EE) those signs were reproduced slightly inaccurately.  AI has accents instead of hairpins for d flat2 (a long and a short one), while the accents over a flat1 in bars 4 and 8 are missing.

category imprint: Differences between sources

b. 3-4

composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major

Few octaves in JC

No octaves in EF

Octaves in PE
..

From the musical point of view, the version of JC seems to be very dubious: the indication [con] 8 - - - is probably written in a wrong place – it was supposed to include the entire bass progression in bar 4. However, most probably we are dealing here with a misunderstanding of the corrections of the entire introduction (bars 1-8) written in a short cut manner in [AI]. The same applies to the version of EF. 

In EF there are no rests at the end of bar 4, as the phrase ends with a crotchet (in the parts of both hands).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors of JC