mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Errors repeated in EE

b. 50-55

composition: Op. 30, Mazurka in D♭ major

..

In this entire phrase, kept in the key of F minor, Chopin overlooked 5 naturals raising g notes (in various octaves) to g:

  • g1 in bars 50 and 53,
  • g in bars 51 and 54,
  • g2 in bar 55.

In EE accidentals were added in bars 53 and 55, while in GE all except in bar 53.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Accidentals in different octaves , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals , Errors of FC , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in EE

b. 52

composition: Op. 22, Andante spianato

..

None of the sources features the  lowering e2 to e2 on the 8th semiquaver of the bar. In such situations, when an accidental has already appeared at the same pitch yet under an octave sign, both Chopin and his publishers would often consider it to be valid. The inaccuracy, certainly repeated after [A], does not result in any textual doubts and is indeed hardly noticeable.

category imprint: Interpretations within context

issues: Accidentals in different octaves , Inaccuracies in FE , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in EE

b. 55

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

..

In the sources, the octave sign does not encompass the grace note, as a result of which, when interpreted literally, it is a b1 and not a b2. The notation of analogous bar 64 proves a mistake in the placement of the octave sign.

category imprint: Interpretations within context

issues: Errors in FE , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in EE

b. 56

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

6 notes on 5th quaver-beat in AsI

6 notes on 5th quaver-beat in AsI

5 notes in A (→GE→FE,EE,FESB), interpretation

5 notes in A (→GE→FE,EE,FESB), interpretation
..

In A and in all editions, over the 5-note 1st half of the figure on the 3rd beat of the bar, we can observe a seemingly wrong digit – 6. However, the error consists in a missing note – a2 between b2 and g2 – which is proven by:

  • the text of AsI, which includes this note – visible are 6 note stems, although the pitch of the penultimate one is unclear (the ledger line is inaccurately written). The figure begins with a written-out turn, like the three remaining similar phrases in b. 55-57;
  • discrepancy between the number of the notes and the actual number, which means that Chopin did not realise that he was entering a text containing a smaller number of notes. Therefore, it is not a change of concept but an oversight.

The mistake remained unnoticed, both by Chopin (who was probably proofreading GE1 and certainly FE1) and by the revisers, who did not check the rhythmic correctness of this figure.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Rhythmic errors , Errors of A , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in FE , Errors repeated in EE

b. 57

composition: Op. 22, Polonaise

..

The sources are lacking in the accidental before the 2nd played note of the run. It must be Chopin's mistake (one of the most frequent ones – oversight of an alteration's cancellation), since a2 would have suggested a turn towards B major (G minor), and not F minor, whose dominant we are about to hear. Due to the absence of this accidental, a2 should also be in the ending of the run.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Editorial revisions

issues: Omissions to cancel alteration , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in EE