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. 134

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

Fingering written into FEH

No teaching fingering
..

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FEH

b. 134-137

composition: Op. 22, Polonaise

..

The accents over the 2nd sixth in b. 134-136 and the wedges over the first one in b. 135 and 137 are arbitrary additions of the revision of EE – see the notes to b. 133-136 and 136-137.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions

b. 134-135

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

in AF

in FE (→EE)

No sign in GE

() suggested by the editors
..

The change of the range and position of the  hairpin in FE (→EE), although minor, is yet important – the mark of FE seems to concern the R.H. bottom voice, which does not result from the Chopinesque notation. According to us, it refers to the R.H. top voice, yet due to the notation without spaces between the great staves, its placement over this voice would be misleading – it could be interpreted as a mark under the L.H. part in b. 119. Taking into account the not entirely precise notation, in the main text we include a  in a variant form.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Inaccuracies in FE

b. 134-136

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

Upper part, notation in AF

Upper part, notation in FE

Upper part, notation in GE

Upper part, notation in EE
..

In b. 134 and 136, the Chopinesque manner of writing stems always on the right-hand side of the noteheads contributed to an incomprehensible reproduction of the two-part notation of AF by the engraver of FE and, consequently, the totally erroneous notation of EE. In the main text we give the simplest and probably the latest notation introduced by Chopin in [AG] (→GE).
Similarly in b. 138-140.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , Corrections in A , Errors resulting from corrections , FE revisions , Inaccuracies in A , Partial corrections

b. 134

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

G without slur in AF

Rest in GE

G with slur in FE (→EE)
..

It is difficult to say which version of the 1st beat of the bar is later and whether Chopin considered any of them to be final. According to us, when the G bass note is played, it distorts the rhythmic scheme of this phrase, in which the accented quaver triplet, which is the local climax, is exposed against the L.H. rest. Chopin could have inserted this crotchet to compensate its absence in the previous bar – cf. b. 9 and 101 – later, however, in [AG] (→GE) he considered keeping the phrase's rhythm to be more important.
A similar issue can also be found in b. 139.

In FE (→EE) this G note is the starting point of a slur, which is a mistake. Moreover, the bass clef was not reintroduced here in AF (→FE→EE), which is Chopin's patent mistake.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Errors of A , Accompaniment changes , Errors repeated in FE , Errors repeated in EE