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. 187-191

composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor

No L.H. slur in EE, GC & FE

Slur in GE
..

Just like in preceding bars, a slur in the L.H. was arbitrarily added in GE, with the scope corresponding to the scope of the authentic slur in the R.H.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions

b. 187

composition: Op. 38, Ballade in F major

..

In GC (→GE) the slur in the R.H. was drawn from the beginning of the bar.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GC

b. 187

composition: Op. 38, Ballade in F major

..

FE1 overlooked the bottom note of the last semiquaver in the R.H. The error was corrected in FE2 (→FE3).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 187

composition: Op. 19, Bolero

c2 in FE (→GE,EE)

b1 in FEO
..

In FE (→GE,EE), the trilled note is a c2. In FEO, it was changed to b1, most probably by Chopin. We consider this correction to be final and we adopt it in the main text.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FEO

b. 187

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

b1 in A & GE2

c2 in GE1

e1-c2 in FE (→EE)
..

The b1 note on the 5th quaver in the bottom voice (our main text) is written in A and confirmed in parts of oboes and clarinets in Morch. GE1 most probably has erroneous c2 here, which, in the proofreading of FE (→EE), was replaced with an e1-c2 sixth. It is very likely that the proofreading was introduced by Chopin himself; however, it does not prove that he wanted to change the version written in ½A in this way – it could have been an ad hoc correction of the erroneous version of GE1. In this situation, we consider the less pianistically convenient version of FE, in which the consistent harmonic sequence in ½A (cf. the previous bar) was distorted, to be only a variant. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE