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. 124

composition: Op. 22, Polonaise

..

In the main text we add a cautionary  before g1 (cf. authentic  in b. 122).

category imprint: Editorial revisions

b. 124

composition: Op. 22, Polonaise

..

In FE (→GE1), there is not a single accidental under the octave sign. The patent inaccuracy – the preceding flats before d2 and g2 were considered sufficient – was corrected in EE and – partially – in GE2 (→GE3), in which a  was added only before g3.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions

b. 124-125

composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor

Continuous slur in Af

2 slurs in GE, literal reading

Contextual interpretation of GE, our alternative suggestion
..

In the main text we give the continuous slur of AF, reproduced in FE and EE with minor inaccuracies related to the transition to a new line, starting from b. 125 – in EE the slur in b. 124 was led to the g crotchet only, whereas in FE the continuation of the slur on a new line is placed under the stave. The separated slurs of GE may be authentic – it seems that Chopin was gradually completing the slurring of the L.H. part while writing [AG], and it is AF that presents the final result of this process (in GE2 the slur ending in b. 124 was reproduced inaccurately, as a result of which it seems that its ending falls on a). The slur that begins in b. 125, perhaps added at the stage of proofreading of GE1, was placed under the stave – probably to avoid layout complications in b. 128. Therefore, as an alternative solution we suggest a slur of the same range, yet led over the tenor voice, to which it refers.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , EE inaccuracies , Authentic corrections of GE

b. 124-125

composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor

No sign in AF (→FE→EE)

in GE

 suggested by the editors
..

In GE the short  hairpin was most probably reproduced inaccurately, since the mark clearly refers to the R.H. part and seems to command crescendo at the beginning of the chord, which lasts the entire bar. Therefore, it is either a reversed accent or – which is more likely – a  emphasising the secundal step under b. 124-125. It is the last interpretation that we suggest in the main text. A similar marking of such motifs, often misinterpreted by engravers, can be found in Chopin's pieces on a number of occasions, e.g. in the Concerto in F Minor, Op. 21, II mov., b. 84. 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins

b. 124

composition: Op. 23, Ballade in G minor

L.H. long accent in A

R.H. long accent in FE

R.H. short accent in GE

in EE
..

Due to the high position of the chord, the clear long accent over the L.H. chord is partially on the top stave in A, as a result of which FE (→GE,EE) linked it to the R.H. part. Consequently, the mark was also moved horizontally, hence in FE it looks like a long accent under the d3 quaver. This is how it was understood in GE, in which, however, it was reduced to the size of a common short accent. EE considered the mark a short diminuendo and slightly shifted it to the left.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Inaccuracies in A