mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Rhythmic errors

b. 95

composition: Op. 22, Polonaise

Semiquaver in FE, possible interpretation

Quaver in GE & EE

Quaver suggested by the editors
..

In FE the bar opens with a semiquaver in the R.H. and a quaver in the L.H. It is a mistake, yet it is unclear which value is correct:

  • a quaver requires the following 3 semiquavers to be considered a triplet. Such a rhythm naturally develops the scheme used in the previous bars – both the starting point of the new motif on the 2nd quaver of the bar and the homogeneous semiquaver triplet movement are preserved. We give this version in the main text (we also mark the triplets), adopted in EE and GE, also due to association with the polonaise rhythm;
  • a semiquaver is less obvious in this context, yet one cannot rule it out – such a rhythmic diversification of a recently heard model absolutely corresponds to the Chopinesque style. Such an understanding of this rhythm is supported by the layout of the notes in FE, which proves that the engraver was convinced that he was dealing with four regular semiquavers.

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

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions , Rhythmic errors

b. 97

composition: Op. 22, Polonaise

..

In FE (→EE) the 1st rest in the parts of both hands is a demisemiquaver, which is a mistake (it is likely that the beginning of this bar was confused with the previous one). The mistake was corrected in GE.

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

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

b. 107

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

..

In A (→GE1→FE) the dot extending the value of the crotchet was inadvertently written next to f1. The mistake was corrected in EE and GE2. The traces of erasures visible in A suggest that Chopin first inadvertently wrote dots next to both notes and then he mistook them again, deleting the one that should have stayed.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors resulting from corrections , GE revisions , Rhythmic errors , Errors of A

b. 110

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

..

GC does not have a quaver flag here, which is most probably an error of the copyist.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Rhythmic errors , Errors of GC

b. 110

composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I

Minim d1 in Atut (literal reading→FE→GE,EE)

Dotted minim d​1 in Atut, contextual interpretation
..

In Atut, the rhythmic value of the d1 minim is unclear – there is no stem next to it, hence it seems to be a semibreve. It can be a mere deficiency, frequent in Chopin's autographs; however, it cannot be excluded that Chopin planned here a dotted minim, like it is in the orchestra (bassoon I) and in similar bars 122 and 682.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Rhythmic errors , FE revisions , Inaccuracies in A