mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Inaccuracies in FE

b. 4-6

composition: Op. 10 No 4, Etude in C♯ minor

Slur in AI

Slur in FE (→GE1,EE)

Our suggestion
..

Both lack of the slur in bar 6 in AI and in bars 4-5 in FE (→GE1,EE) may be considered as inaccuracy of notation related to the transition to the new line (such situations are very frequent in Chopin's pieces, e.g., in the Etude in F major, No. 8, bars 34-36 and 61 or E major, No. 11 bars 40-42). Taking into consideration the clear slur in the analogous phrase in bars 1-2, in the main text we suggest a similar solution, combining two slurs appearing in the enumerated sources. In GE2 and subsequent GE,s, a slur was added in bar 5.

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

issues: Inaccuracies in FE

b. 4

composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt II

..

FE (except for FE4) lacks in five necessary accidentals – naturals before d2 and b and sharps before f, f2 and g2. This patent inaccuracy certainly has its source in the notation of [A]. Similarly in GC, in which, however, Chopin added a  raising b to b. In GC (→GE) there are also no naturals before the last octave in the R.H. – it can be an oversight of the copyist or a later addition in [A]. In the remaining sources the signs were completed (all additions can be attributed to a revision): three were added in EE1 and FE4, four in GE; only EE2 includes the correct notation. Cf. bar 24.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals , FE revisions , Inaccuracies in GC , Authentic corrections in GC

b. 4

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

Long accent in #Wf (→#Wn)

Short accent in EE
..

A precise differentiation between long and short accents, typical of Chopin's notation, and assigning them to the right or left hand is impossible due to the missing autograph and visible inaccuracies of the first editions. In FE, it is possible to observe differences between accents in some cases; it also applies to GE to a lesser extent. In turn, the reviser of EE reproduced almost all accents as short. It is impossible to clearly identify in which places the notation of FE reproduces Chopin's notation faithfully (which can also be imprecise) and in which ones the length of the accent results from a random event or an inaccuracy. We try to reproduce the composer's intention taking into account his habits in this respect, documented by sources in other compositions.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions; Source & stylistic information

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE

b. 4-5

composition: Op. 28 No. 15, Prelude in D♭ major

Separate slurs in A (→FE)

Continuous slur in FC (→GE) & EE
..

The continuous phrase mark of FC (→GE) is a mistake of the copyist – the phrase marks in A are clearly separated, and their shape does not indicate that they should be combined. In FE b. 4 ends a line, while the phrase mark in b. 4 suggests that it should be continued, which, generally, is not confirmed by the phrase mark in b. 5 (cf. the beginning of the next line in FE). Considered as a whole, however, the notation of FE may be misleading, which explains the presence of a continuous phrase mark in EE.  

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Errors of FC

b. 4-5

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

Short slur in AI

Longer slur from third in FE (→GE,EEC)

Longer slur from g in EEW
..

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

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE