mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description
Select: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Notation
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

b. 4

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

No grace note in GC (→GE)

Grace note in FE (→EE)

Our variant suggestion
..

It is not clear whether Chopin wanted to have a grace note already in this bar – it appears without any doubts in bars 10, 22, 30 and analog. The ornament was deleted – most probably by Chopin – in GC, yet it remained in FE despite a few corrections and visible traces of development in pupil's copies. Due to these reasons, in the main text we suggest a variant solution.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Chopin's hesitations , Authentic corrections in GC

b. 4-20

composition: Op. 64 No 2, Waltz in C♯ minor

e1 & c1 in As, 1. version

f1 & c1 in AI

f1 & d1 in As, 2. version
or
f1 & d1 in A (→FE→GE,EE)
..

As includes two written versions of bar 4 – in the main course of the text it features the version with e1 as the bottom note of all dyads in the R.H. and the g-c1 fourth as the 2nd crotchet in the L.H. and above one can see the version with f1 and the g-d1 fifth. Bar 20 is not written out in As, hence it is meant to be the same as bar 4. We adopt the first, undoubtedly earlier, version to be the text of As, since the second became the final one (not including the rhythm). It cannot be excluded that the second version was added not in the first phase of writing the Waltz, yet later, even after having written AI, in which the part of the L.H. still conserved its original shape (the g-c1 fourth), whereas in the part of the R.H. in bar 4 one can see a correction from the original version.  

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Corrections of AI

b. 4

composition: Op. 64 No 2, Waltz in C♯ minor

No pedalling in A (→FE→EE,GE1no2,GE1op→GE2op→GE3op)

Pedalling in #FE2no2

Our suggestion
..

According to us, the absence of pedalling in this bar in A is a result of Chopin's temporary uncertainty on whether and how to mark it, when the harmony changes on the 3rd beat of the bar. It is the first situation of this kind in the Waltz and the composer temporarily considered, as it seems, to sustain the bass note c with hand, like in bar 12 – the visible deletion most probably concerned the c minim. One can assume that the final version could be the pedalling of analogous bar 20, written already after having found a satisfactory solution in bars 8 and 10. Therefore, in the main text we suggest this pedalling; a respective addition was introduced already in GE2no2. 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: GE revisions

b. 4-20

composition: Op. 64 No 2, Waltz in C♯ minor

Slur in bar 20 in A (→FE→EE,GE1op,GE1no2)

Slur in bar 4 & 20 in GE2op (→GE3op) & GE2no2
..

The slur, added in later GE in bar 4 certainly after an authentic slur in analogous bar 20, can be considered to be a justified addition to the version of A and the remaining editions. In the main text, however, we preserve the differentiation between bars 4 and 20 in this detail, as it may suggest a subtle performance nuance. (In As and AI, in which the 2nd and 3rd crotchets are identical, the slurs are absent both in bars 4 and 20.) 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions

b. 4-5

composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II

Slur up to bar 5 in A, EE & GE2

Slur in bar 4 in GE1 (→FE)
..

A shorter slur of GE1 is (together with the previous one) a clear example of carelessness presented by the engraver of GE1 at the time of handling the slurring written in A.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions