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. 159-161

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

e repeated in GE

e tied in FE (→EE)
..

A comparison with analogous b. 140-141 indicates that it is the oversight that is the most likely reason for the absence of the tie to e in GE.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE

b. 159-160

composition: Op. 23, Ballade in G minor

..

Under these three L.H. chords, one can see deletions in A; however, they allow us to decipher the deleted text – the same chords written down an octave lower. According to us, it did not necessarily have to be the initial version but a mistake – a bar earlier, an identical motif is written down in the bass clef; while writing the same chords in the treble clef, Chopin could have had the impression that the very change of clef assured the transfer of the notes an octave higher. Cf. a similar situation in the Scherzo in C minor, Op. 39, b. 345-347. Interestingly, traces of an identical correction introduced in print are also visible in FE. The only possible explanation would involve Chopin having introduced the correction into A after FE1 had already been engraver, e.g. while proofreading this edition. Did Chopin want to 'erase all evidence' of his (possible) mistake? It could have been distraction – while comparing two texts of the Ballade in search for mistakes, A and the proof copy of FE1, Chopin could have discovered his mistake when looking at A and automatically corrected it there; afterwards, he would mark the change in the printed text. Cf. a similar situation in b. 171.

category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Corrections in A , Deletions in A , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 159

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

2 quavers in AsI

Quaver & rest in A (→GE1→GE2), arpeggio sign after chord

Quaver & rest in FE, EE & FESB

Quaver & rest in GE3, no arpeggio sign
..

The version of AsI, closer to the rhythm of the previous bars, must be earlier. In the main text we adhere to the improved version of the remaining sources.

In the main text we correct the mistake (probably by Chopin) in the notation of the arpeggio, since it is unlikely that a wavy line in this position could have a different meaning.  

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

issues: Accompaniment changes

b. 159

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

..

In the main text we add a cautionary  to e in the chord in the alternative L.H. part. Chopin used it in this context in AsI, in the initial version of this place yet based on the same chord.

category imprint: Editorial revisions; Source & stylistic information

issues: Cautionary accidentals

b. 160

composition: Op. 43, Tarantella

 
 
..

In all the sources except FC3 the chord on the second beat is written out as a crotchet with a quaver rest. In FC3 there are a rest and augmentation dot but only on the upper note of the chord.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FC