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. 6

composition: Op. 25 No 10, Etude in B minor

..

The sharps returning f1 and F on the 3rd beat of the bar are present only in GE2 (→GE3). A similar mistake appears in bar 108.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Omissions to cancel alteration , GE revisions

b. 6-7

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

..

There are no quaver rests at the end of b. 6 and 7 in GC (→GE). It is probably the copyist's mistake.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors of GC , Errors repeated in GE

b. 6

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

Fingering written into FES

No teaching fingering
..

The fingering digit, written with a quill pen most probably by a pupil, was probably added in place of an entry written in pencil by Chopin.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FES

b. 6

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

Sixth in A

No sixth in GE (→FE→EE)
..

It is difficult to state whether the omission of the minim sixth at the beginning of the bar is a mistake of the engraver or a result of Chopin's proofreading. According to us, the spread chord beginning the solo part constitutes a sufficient sound equivalent for the played chord ending the orchestra's introduction (cf. the compatible version of bar 96), which may be an argument for an intentional removal of this sixth (it cannot be excluded that, even if the engraver omitted this sixth accidentally, Chopin accepted this version). Whereas the chord of the strings in the version with orchestra is only a background for the entrance of the soloist, playing a sixth in the version for one piano diverts attention from the beginning of the solo part to a certain extent.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of GE

b. 6

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

Rhythm in A

Rhythm in GE

Rhythm in FE

Interpretation of FE suggested by the editors

Rhythm in EE

Interpretation of A suggested by the editors
..

All source notations of the 2nd half of the bar are erroneous or unclear, however, none of them can be corrected in a way that would not be questioned.

  • In A the 3rd beat of the bar includes 9 demisemiquavers.
  • In GE the introduction of a smaller font to write demisemiquavers does not have an impact on the rhythmic values and seems to be an arbitrary decision of the engraver: he could have noticed a difference between the size of note heads in the 1st and 2nd halves of the bar. It appears even more likely when considering his blunder in the first Tutti in the 1st movement of the Concerto; following that incident, he must have paid attention even to the slightest differences in the size of note heads.
  • The corrected notation of FE, which interpreted literally is at the very least unclear, could have been a result of that mistake. Since the proofreading of FE was probably performed on Chopin's demand, one has to consider what its intended result could have been. The suggested solution is both formally correct and very close to the genuine source notation.
  • It is hard to guess what the idea behind the actions of the reviser of EE was.

In this situation, we base the main text on the version of A which, in spite of its inaccuracies, seems to be the most reliable, as far as the authenticity is concerned. Out of two natural possibilities of correcting the mistake (changing two demisemiquavers to hemidemisemiquavers or deleting one of the dots extending the e1 quaver) we choose the second, giving a smoother development of the figuration introducing the main theme. We suggest a modified version of FE as an alternative version.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Errors in GE , Rhythmic errors , Errors of A , Authentic corrections of FE