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. 132

composition: Op. 38, Ballade in F major

e1 in A (→FE1,EE,GC→GE)

e1 in FE2 (→FE3)
..

It is also in this bar that we give the unambiguous version of A (→EE,GC→GE) in the main text, in spite of the fact that while proofreading FE2 (→FE3), Chopin added a  lowering e1 to e1. This version must be considered as authentic, yet not necessarily final – the composer, not seeing the following text in this line, could have heard here a harmonic progression analogous to the one in bars 101 and 126, therefore, in the previous phase of the phrase's development.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Errors resulting from corrections , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 132-133

composition: Op. 38, Ballade in F major

 in A

 in GC (→GE)

in FE

 cresc. in EE
..

All versions of dynamic indications differing from the one written in A result from an inaccurate reproduction of the notation of the autograph:

  • shift of the cresc. indication in GC, slightly intensified in GE, is an inaccuracy that was probably aimed at keeping the notation transparent. Its possible influence on the performance seems to be marginal.
  • the changes introduced in EE (forced by the start of a new line), and particularly the ones in FE, in which the  hairpin was shortened and the cresc. indication was omitted, contribute to a more serious change of the layout.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , EE inaccuracies

b. 132-133

composition: Op. 38, Ballade in F major

Fragment of slur in A (→GC)

Slurs in FE

Slurs in EE

No slurs in GE
..

In both A (→GC) and EE, starting a new line resulted in inattention and leaving unfinished fragments of slurs (in A in bar 131, in EE in bar 132). FE completed the slurs in keeping with the analogous bars 125-127 and the R.H. slurs. This might have been done by the reviser or even the engraver. We give this undoubtedly right version in the main text. However, GE not only left bars 132-133 without slurs but omitted the second one in bar 131.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions; Source & stylistic information

issues: EE revisions , Inaccurate slurs in A , GE revisions , Uncertain slur continuation

b. 132

composition: Op. 26 No 2, Polonaise in E♭ minor

..

GE1 overlooked staccato dots in the R.H. over the 1st beat and the last quaver in the bar.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE

b. 132

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

Dotted minim in GC (→GE)

Minim in FE (→EE)

Two-part notation suggested by the editors
..

The version of FE (→EE) is most probably inaccurate – cf. bar 131. In the main text we write the chord in the version of GC using two-part notation, in order to facilitate the interpretation and after the previous bars.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Different values of chord components