mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Authentic corrections of FC

b. 43

composition: Op. 30 No. 1, Mazurka in C minor

in FC (→GE)

No sign in FE (→EE)
..

In a different situation, the  mark, added by Chopin in FC, could be considered a long accent on the 3rd beat of the bar. However, in this case, a comparison with analogous bars 7 and 15 reveals that it is the interpretation adopted by GE that is correct – a  hairpin from the 2nd beat to the end of the bar.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins , Authentic corrections of FC

b. 43-44

composition: Op. 30, Mazurka in D♭ major

in FC

in FE (→EE)

in GE
..

The  hairpin in FC was extended by Chopin so that it ends more or less where the mark in FE (→EE) does. Both marks encompass bar 44, in which the R.H. part motifs – the two-note ending of a descending motif (in a 'strong-weak' scheme) and a rest – practically excludes the performance of a crescendo. Therefore, it refers to the L.H., particularly to its top voice. This sheds new light on the extension of the hairpin in FC – it was probably an attempt at fixing the copyist's mistake without resorting to deletions. Due to the above, in the main text we give the FE hairpin, most probably corresponding to the [A] notation.
In GE, the mark was shortened in order to avoid the rest (since the mark was referred to the R.H.).

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Errors of FC , Authentic corrections of FC

b. 44-45

composition: Op. 30 No. 1, Mazurka in C minor

Slur in FE (→EE)

Slurs in FC (→GE)

Slurs suggested by the editors
..

The slur encompassing the sequence of thirds in bar 44 was added to FC almost certainly by Chopin. However, unlike in bars 8-9, Chopin did not shorten the top slur, which also reaches the end of the bar. According to us, the reason could have been to avoid an excessive number of deletions, hence in the main text we suggest the same notation as in bars 8-9.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Authentic corrections of FC

b. 45

composition: Op. 25 No 5, Etude in E minor

in FC (→GE) & EE3

No indication in FE & EE1 (→EE2)
..

The indication of the metronome tempo was added by Chopin in FC in pencil, hence in the last phase of preparing the Stichvorlage manuscripts for print. Differently than at the beginning of the Etude, here the composer added the indication only in this copy. In EE3 it was certainly added on the basis of comparison with GE.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Authentic corrections of FC

b. 45

composition: Op. 25 No 5, Etude in E minor

in FC (→GE) & EE

in FE
..

In the main text we give sostenuto, written in FC by Chopin after deleting two other indications, including probably ben tenuto, which was preserved in FE. Moreover, the indication concerning the R.H. was corrected by Chopin twice – at the beginning he wrote another indication and obliterated it (perhaps delicato) and then he changed leggierissimo (used then in bar 81) to leggiero.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Authentic corrections of FC