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. 189-190

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

No sign in A (→FC→GE1, →FE→EE) & GE3

 in GE2
..

The  hairpin is an arbitrary addition of GE2 (removed in GE3), modelled after b. 57-58. Chopin added similar, although slightly differently placed marks in FC in b. 49-50 & 57-58, yet he did not repeat that addition for the second time (b. 181-182 & 189-190). The reviser of GE2 must have noticed the missing  mark (see the adjacent note) and repeated both indications, i.e. , after having checked analogous b. 57.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions

b. 189

composition: Op. 22, Polonaise

..

The 1st semiquaver in the 5th triplet in GE2 is an erroneous a2 (with repeated ). The mistake was corrected in GE3.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions

b. 189

composition: Op. 22, Polonaise

..

Like in b. 45, of which the discussed bar is a literal repetition, FE (→GE1→GE2) are lacking in the accidental before the 5th semiquaver from the end, which results in a g2. The mistake was corrected in EE and GE3.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Omissions to cancel alteration , GE revisions , Errors repeated in GE

b. 189

composition: Op. 22, Polonaise

..

Like in b. 45, FE repeated a  before a, the bottom note of the penultimate L.H. quaver. It is probably a result of the latest stage of proofreading of FE, since this accidental is absent both in GE and EE.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Cautionary accidentals

b. 189-191

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

Long accent in AF

Short accent in FE (→EE)

in GE1

in GE2

Our alternative variant suggestion
..

The clarification of the fading out of the music before the final accent is the last of the group of the Chopinesque improvements written down most probably already in [AG] (→GE1). The fact that the mark in GE2 starts earlier is most probably a result of an arbitrary decision – a frequently applied adjustment to the rhythmic structure, which in this case is a bar.
AF features a long accent, similar to the ones in b. 174-176. However, the mark in FE is short, which probably resulted from shifting it so that it would not intersect with the g quaver stem. In turn, it is unclear whether the accent of AF and the hairpin of GE1 describe different performance concepts or simply different aspects of the same performance. Taking into account the above, in the main text we give the text of GE1; as an alternative solution we suggest a variant version based thereupon.  

category imprint: Differences between sources