|
b. 1-6
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
In JC, the components of some out of the two-part written chords in the R.H. are linked with an additional stem. It is entirely clear in the case of the chords on the 2nd beat of bars 1-3 and the last chord in bar 5; the notation of the chords on the 2nd beat of bars 5-6 is less precise. It is hard to determine if it corresponds to the notation of [AI], yet such a possibility cannot be excluded. Assuming a possible authenticity of this notation, there arises a problem of its interpretation: in the case of chords on the 2nd beat of the bar, a common stem may indicate an incorporation of the lower note of the third to the 1st quaver of the lower voice or, on the contrary, an extension of the 1st quaver. In the editions, there are no traces of this notation detail. category imprint: Source & stylistic information |
||||||||||||||||||
|
b. 1
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
The repetition of bars 1-24 is marked only in EF. While the repetition of the initial segment of the Polonaise seems to be justified, the way it is notated – beginning the repeated segment at the start of bar 1 and two voltas of final bar 24 – is probably non-authentic. category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||||||||||||
|
b. 1
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
The number in the title of the piece in EF refers to the position of the Polonaise in the collection of three polonaises created by Fontana, published as one book as a part of the edited by him posthumous Chopin's works (in FEF the book was marked as Op. 71). In the main text we do not consider this non-authentic numbering. category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||||||||||||
|
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 10 No 1, Etude in C major
..
In the main text we give the title as adopted in FE and confirmed in the engraver's copy of several Etudes (No. 5-8 and 12). The title included in CLI, although earlier, is also authentic – Chopin himself described in this way one of his etudes in a letter to a friend – and reflects Chopin's pragmatic approach to the issue of the pieces' names (cf. the original title of Berceuse Op. 57, "Variants"). Therefore, it is hard to assume that the extended titles of GE and EE were something more than a marketing ploy of the publishers, which, after all, were gladly used also in case of other genres, e.g., in waltzes, in which the authentic titles were extended with different adjectives: 'grande' in Op. 18, 24, 42, 'brillante' in Op. 34, 'nouvelle' in Op. 42 (see also Etudes Op. 25). We also give this dedication in the version of FE (→GE). Its extension in EE seems to be rather an idea of the publisher who, however, could have agreed it with Chopin. Apart from FE1 (→EE2→EE3), the erroneous initial of Liszt's name (J) also appears in some copies of FE2 and GE1. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Dedications , GE revisions , Various titles |
||||||||||||||||||
|
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 10 No 1, Etude in C major
..
We give the time signature's indication after CLI. Although FE (→GE,EE) has a category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Changes of metre , 4/4 or 2/2 |
, it is difficult to assume that the change of time signature was intentional, as in 
does not appear in any of the Etudes (contrary to the manuscripts), cf. the Etude in C
minor, No. 4, F major, No. 8 and C minor, No. 12. This phenomenon is also present in other pieces, even in the most obvious cases, e.g., in the Etudes in F minor, Op. 25 No. 2, D
major, Op. 25 No. 8 or F minor, Dbop. 36 No. 1.