mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Errors repeated in EE

b. 58

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

Earlier ver­sion in AsI, contextual interpretation

Final version, spelling in sources, contextual interpretation

Final version, spelling suggested by the editors
..

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

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

b. 58

composition: Op. 63 No. 1, Mazurka in B major

Continuous slur in AI

2 slurs in FE (→GE1,EE)

3 slurs in GE2 (→GE3)
..

As in bars 53-56, the division of the initial slur of AI into 3 shorter ones, encompassing particular motifs, is an element of the change of the general concept of slurring of the middle section of the Mazurka. The missing slur in bar 58 in FE (→GE1,EE) is probably an oversight, corrected in GE2 (→GE3).

category imprint: Differences between sources

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

b. 58

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

..

The authentic chromatic notation of the descending part of the roulade takes into account the validity of the previously entered accidentals only to a minimal extent:

  • In a few places Chopin chose enharmonic variants requiring a greater number of accidentals than necessary – c4 as the 15th note, b3 (18th), g3 (25th), f3 (29th), e3 (33rd), c3 (39th), b2 (43rd). As in such a chromatic sequence enharmonic variants of notation practically do not impact the understanding of music, we exceptionally change this orthography in the main text to avoid excessive complications. It allows us to reduce the number of accidentals on the 2nd, 3rd and 4th beats of the bar by 8 (in the authentic notation we also count the 3 accidentals overlooked by Chopin – see below).
  • Assuming a regular structure of the figuration – which is almost impossible to challenge – Chopin overlooked a  cancelling an alteration that has occurred earlier in the bar three times – no naturals to c4 (14th note), a3 (20th note) and f3 (31st note).
  • The  to g3 was unnecessarily repeated (22nd note).

This notation was repeated without any changes by the majority of the editions. Only in FESB a  restoring c4 was added (14th note).

The choice between the orthography of the sources (complemented) and the one proposed by us is made possible in the note presenting the earlier version of the R.H. figuration recorded in #ApI.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

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

b. 59-60

composition: Op. 22, Polonaise

..

EE1 is lacking in the accidentals before the last semiquaver in b. 59 and the 4th note of the quintuplet in b. 60. These are patent mistakes – cf. the  lowering d2 to d2 in analogous b. 21 – probably committed still in [A], from which they got into EE1 through a proof copy of FE. In the very FE (→GE) Chopin not only added both flats in the last stage of proofreading, but also a cautionary  before d3 at the end of b. 60. All 3 accidentals were also added in EE2.
The same in b. 203-204.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Cautionary accidentals , Omission of current key accidentals , Authentic corrections of FE , Errors repeated in EE

b. 59-61

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

..

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Omission of current key accidentals , Errors of A , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in FE , Errors repeated in EE