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. 154

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

Rhythm with semiquaver in A (→GE)

Rhythm with quaver in FE (→EE)
..

The FE (→EE) rhythm is the initial version. To the main text we adopt the rhythm corrected by Chopin in A (→GE), after [FC] (→FE) had been finished – the correction is proven by small graphic details, e.g. a slightly different colour intensity of the added dots and semiquaver flags. The quaver triplet movement, prevailing both before and after this bar, allows us to assume that the variation is only of graphic nature – Chopin tried to write a rhythm in which the last played note is a triplet quaver in the simplest way possible, which, in this situation, is to be considered the most appropriate performance.
The same applies to bar 234. 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Corrections in A

b. 154

composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt IV

d2 in sources

d2 suggested by the editors
..

Harmonic reasons – a B minor chord is a more natural introduction to the key of F minor in the next bar than its major counterpart – provide an argument for the omission of the  to the top note of the chord at the beginning of the bar (d2, and not d2). This conclusion is confirmed by analogies with similar phrases – cf. bar 161 and 99.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

issues: Omission of current key accidentals , Errors of A

b. 154

composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt I

a2-c3 in A, contextual interpretation

c3-c3 in GE (→FE,EE,IE)
..

The way the 3rd quaver in the bar was written down in A is unclear – one can see a protrusion before the c3 minim, resembling a quaver notehead at the same pitch, while the presence of an a2 quaver is unobvious, since the protrusion of the stem indicating the presence of a notehead is imperceptible. Consequently, in GE (→FE,EE,IE) both voices coincide on c3, while a2 is totally absent. In the main text we provide a different interpretation of the A notation – we consider the c3 quaver a remaining element of the initial version (or erroneous) of notation without the note having been prolonged, while in the bottom voice we put a2, which – as resulting in a more natural melodic sequence in this voice – is, according to us, written here.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Errors resulting from corrections , Inaccuracies in A

b. 154

composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt IV

Slur from B1 in A

Slur from B in GE (→FE,EE,IE)
..

Neither the range nor the shape of the A slur suggest that it should start from the 1st quaver in the bar, as it was reproduced by GE (→FE,EE,IE). We retain the notation of A in the main text.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions

b. 154-156

composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt IV

No fingering in A (→GE→FE,IE)

Fingering in EE
..

In the main text, we do not include the inauthentic L.H. fingering added by EE.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions