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. 7-9

composition: Op. 50 No. 1, Mazurka in G major

Continued slur to end of bar 8 in Afrag

New slur to end of bar 8 in A1, literal reading

2 slurs in A1, contextual interpretation

New slur to bar 9 in FE1

Continued slur to bar 9 in GE

No slur in FE2 & EE
..

To the main text we adopt the version of GE, consistently present also in analogous b. 31-33 and 63-65, which shows that the notation of [A2] was almost certainly like that. We can also see the continuation of the slur over the rest in b. 7 written by Chopin's hand in Afrag, while the fact that the slur was led to b. 9 is confirmed by the slur of A1 in b. 32-33 and possible Chopinesque proofreading of FE1 in b. 8-9 and FE2 in b. 64-65. The version of EE and FE2 is erroneous. See also b. 5-6.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Authentic corrections of FE , Uncertain slur continuation , Tenuto slurs

b. 7-8

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

g1 repeated in AI & AF (→FE→EE)

g1 tied in GE
..

Like in b. 3-4, in the main text we give the version with tied g1, coming probably from [AG] (→GE).

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

b. 7

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

..

In the main text we add a cautionary  before f1. The accidental was also added in EE.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions

b. 7

composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione

Triplet slur in A1

Whole-bar slur in CJ

Half-bar slur in CK (probable interpretation→CB)

No slur in EL
..

The significant difference between the slurs of CJ and CK suggests that one of them is probably inaccurate (or both). In the main text we adopt the slur of CJ, which is a natural continuation of the slur in b. 5-6. In our interpretation, the slur of CK encompasses the entire 2nd half of the bar.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A

b. 7

composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione

c3 repeated in A1, CJ & CK (→CB)

c3 tied in EL
..

The tie of c3 must be an arbitrary decision of Kolberg or Szulc.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Revisions in EL