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. 5-6

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

Longer slur in AI & FE (contextual interpretation→GE,EE)

Shorter slur in FE (literal reading)
..

The fact that the slur is not continued in a new line in FE is most probably an oversight by the engraver, and it was interpreted as such in the remaining editions. A longer slur is also present in AI, which allows us to recognise this version as the only one intended by Chopin.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions

b. 5-7

composition: Op. 63 No. 3, Mazurka in C# minor

Lower register of accompaniment in FE1 (→GE)

Higher register of accompaniment in FE2 (→EEW)
..

The authenticity of the change of position of the accompanying chords and the bass register introduced in FE2 (→EE) is unquestionable. In a later version Chopin polished up the sequence of 3 voices contained in chords in the tenor and alto register and avoided a parallel shift of chords (G major→C minor) between bars 7 and 8.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Accompaniment changes , Authentic corrections of FE , Bass register changes

b. 5-13

composition: Op. 30 No. 1, Mazurka in C minor

, ,  in FC (→GE)

No indications in FE (→EE)

in b. 5 in FES
..

The contrasting dynamic indications in bars 5, 9 and 13 were most probably added to FC by Chopin, as were many other markings (e.g. dynamic hairpins or accents). However, one has to emphasise that these marks, although their shape is the same as of some undoubtedly Chopinesque ones (e.g.  in the autograph of the Scherzo in B minor, Op. 31, bar 25,  in the autograph of the Etude in A, Op. 25 No. 1, bars 9 and 22,  in the autograph of the Etude in F minor, Op. 10 No. 9, bars 29 and 33 or in the later autograph of the Polonaise-Fantaisie, Op. 61, bar 1), are also very similar to the Fontana ones. The fact that they could have been written in Chopin's hand is indicated by, e.g. their more delicate, as if pale notation – cf. the analogous markings in the Mazurka in B minor no. 2, written certainly by Fontana.
In bar 5  was added in FES, which, to a certain extent, confirms Chopin's intention to contrast the particular theme phrases, dynamically and probably also expressively.
See also bars 37-45. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FES , Authentic corrections of FC

b. 5-8

composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor

Pedalling in FC (→GE)

in b. 5 in FE (→EE)
..

In FE the pedalling of these bars is indicated in general terms with a  mark at the beginning of the phrase. Initially, a similar situation was in FC, in which, however, Chopin specified this aspect of performance by adding the remaining markings.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: No pedal release mark , Authentic corrections of FC

b. 5-6

composition: Op. 63 No. 2, Mazurka in F minor

1  mark in FE (→EEW)

2  marks in GE
..

The separated  hairpin in GE is a revision facilitating the engraver's work. In Chopin's times, both versions of notation were often considered equivalent.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Hairpins denoting continuation