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. 139

composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt I

..

In GE and EE2, a cautionary  was added next to d1 in the L.H. In the main text, we also add a  next to f3 in the R.H.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions , GE revisions

b. 139

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

No indication in A (→GE) & EE

sempre legato in FE
..

Chopin added sempre legato in the proofreading of FE, probably considering the accompaniment in this and two subsequent bars, devoid of slurs, requiring more precise articulation – in an analogous place in the recapitulation the L.H. is provided with slurs. In EE, in which the slurs were added here, sempre legato was omitted, which can be regarded as a rational solution, compliant with economy of indications, generally characteristic for the Chopin notation. 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: EE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE , Legato & slurs

b. 139

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

7 notes & b1 in A (→GE) & FED

8 notes & b1 in FE (→EE1)

8 notes & b1 in EE2 (→EE3)
..

In FE (→EE) the a1 quaver was doubled, as a result of which the entire group includes 8 notes. In the 1st half of the bar, FE committed two evident mistakes more: the mordent was overlooked as well as the  raising the second b1 to b1 (see also notes in the 2nd half of the bar). In FED Chopin corrected two mistakes: he deleted the superfluous a1 and added the missing . The accumulation of mistakes of FE in this bar must be surprising, particularly if we take into account Chopin's proofreading both in FE1 and FE2 (cf. bar 138). It is also puzzling why, in spite of revisions performed in subsequent impressions of EE (even in this bar), no attempt at indicating the actual number of notes in the group was made, not to mention introducing the correct version of GE1, which was taken into consideration already at the time of revising EE2. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE

b. 139

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

..

FE (→EE1) overlooked the  raising b1 to b1. Chopin corrected this mistake in FED. A natural was added also in EE2 (→EE3), probably on the basis of comparison with GE1.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Errors in FE , Annotations in FED

b. 139

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

 in A

 & dot in GE & EE2 (→EE3)

Dot in FE (→EE1)
..

The omission of the mordent in FE (→EE1) is certainly a mistake – it is hard to imagine that Chopin could have not noticed the remaining mistakes while possibly removing the ornament. However, it should be emphasised that in FED Chopin did not add , in spite of having corrected two other mistakes in the 1st half of the bar. The sign was added in EE2 (→EE3), probably after GE1. The staccato dot present in the sources is a result of a mistake of GE1 – see the note above. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE