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. 142-144

composition: Op. 64 No 2, Waltz in C♯ minor

..

EEW1 overlooked the  hairpin. EEW2 corrected the mistake only partially, by adding a sign in bars 143-144.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in EE

b. 142

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

No slur in A (→GE)

Slur in FE (→EE)

Our alternative suggestion
..

The slur was added in the proofreading of FE (→EE) almost certainly by Chopin (together with a staccato dot above E). Taking into account a possibility of an erroneous interpretation of the Chopin entry, we suggest an alternative solution with a slur from the 2nd quaver in the bar. Cf. bar 290. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of FE

b. 142

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

No mark in A (→GE)

Staccato dot in FE (→EE)
..

The staccato dot over the 1st quaver in the L.H. was added in the proofreading of FE (→EE), most probably by Chopin.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of FE

b. 142

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

..

In the main text we add a cautionary  before d1 in the L.H. The sign was added also in EE3. At the same time, we omit the superfluous in this situation  before d1 present in the sources at the end of the bar in the R.H.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Cautionary accidentals

b. 142

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

e1 under tied a1 in A & FED (probable reading)

No e1 in GE1 (→FE→EE)

e1 before repeated a1 in FED (possible reading)

e1 inside grupetto in GE2
..

The missing e1 crotchet in the bottom voice in GE1 (→FE→EE) is a patent mistake. One could even assume that the engraver of GE1 omitted this note, since the erroneous layout of the group of small notes would have impeded its reasonable placement: it would either fall over the 4th quaver in the L.H. or in the middle of the grupetto of the top voice in the R.H. (the latter was adopted in GE2, where a crotchet was added without correcting the layout of small quavers).

The poorly legible entry in FED certainly includes the added e1, perhaps also deletion of the tie of the a1 minim. According to us, it may mean returning the version of A with sustained a1 or possibly a version close to the one written by Chopin in the recapitulation, with a gruppetto composed of five notes starting after the e1 crotchet.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FED , Errors in GE , GE revisions