mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Inaccuracies in FE

b. 620

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

8-note slur in FE (probable reading)

No slur in GE

9-note slur in FE (possible reading→EE)
..

In FE, it is unclear whether the last note of the bottom voice should be encompassed with the slur or not. In the main text, we lead the slur to the penultimate note in the belief that Chopin used here portato articulation, which he marked with dots under a slur. In EE, the slur encompasses the entire group of 9 notes, which can be considered a variant, since such an interpretation is equally likely. The missing slur in GE and the con forza indication in FE, placed too low, which impeded drawing the slur, suggests that the slur was added in the last phase of proofreading of FE. 

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 629-631

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

in A

Shorter  in FC (→GE)

Longer  in FE (→EE)
..

According to us, the differences in the range of the  hairpin are accidental inaccuracies in the reproduction of the notation of A. In the main text we preserve the mark inserted by Chopin's hand, although its starting point cannot be clearly related to the other elements of notation, which was probably the reason for discrepancies in the remaining sources.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , Inaccuracies in FC

b. 631-632

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

Slur to bar 632 in A (→FC) & EE

Shorter slur in FE & GE
..

In both manuscripts the slur clearly reaches b. 632, although due to the absence of text in this bar – b. 632 opens a section written in an abbreviated manner as repetition of b. 181-244 – it may be considered an inaccuracy. It was regarded as such both in FE and GE. In turn, EE contain the correct slur, probably under the influence of b. 180-181.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE

b. 632-634

composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor

Pedalling in EE

No markings in GC (→GE)

Pedalling in FE

Our suggestion
..

None of the sources provides correct pedalling in these bars. No  in EE (b. 632) and FE (b. 634) may only slightly mislead the performer as in both sources the moment of releasing (changing) pedals is marked with  (accordingly in bars 633 and 635). In GC (→GE) there is no pedalling until the end of the piece, which most certainly can be classified as the copyist's omission (in two last lines of the text 259-266 i 548-553). 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , No pedal release mark , Errors of GC

b. 636-637

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

Slurs in FE (→EE)

Slurs in GE
..

The slurs of FE (→EE) are probably inaccurate, since it is difficult to find a reason that would justify their different range – cf. bars 621-629 and the remaining ones in this fragment. However, it has to be said that if it were not for the ratio of the number of one type of the slurs to the other, it would be the slurs of FE, encompassing the entire motifs, that could be considered to be more accurate. 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions