mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Authentic corrections of FC

b. 125

composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor

in FC (→GE)

No marking in FE (→EE)
..

In the main text we give , entered probably by Chopin into FC (→GE).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of FC

b. 130-133

composition: Op. 25 No 5, Etude in E minor

Long accents in FC

R.H. long accent in FE

R.H. long accents in EE & GE1

Short accents in both hands in GE2 (→GE3)
..

The long accent in bar 130 must have been included in [A], whereas the remaining were added by Chopin in FC and probably in the base text to EE. The added signs have a form of long accents and this is how they were recreated in EE and GE1. In later GE, they were changed to common, short accents. The signs in FC are placed more or less between the staves and they probably concern both hands. In FE, EE and GE1 they were placed under the R.H., whereas in GE2 (→GE3), another set of accents for the L.H. was added.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FC

b. 133

composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor

in FC (→GE1)

No marking in FE (→EE) & GE2
..

Chopin added  to FC (→GE1). It was removed in GE2, perhaps due to a misunderstanding during revision – see the adjacent note.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Errors resulting from corrections , Errors in GE , Authentic corrections of FC

b. 136-137

composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor

New slur from d2 in FC (→GE)

New slur from d2 in FC (→GE)

New slur from c2 in FE (→EE)

New slur from c2 in FE (→EE)
..

In FC, the continuous slur written initially by the copyist, encompassing the last 5 bars, was divided into two slurs by Chopin between the 2nd and 3rd beats of this bar. We give this version, undoubtedly Chopinesque and present in the principal source, in the main text. On the other hand, the authenticity of the FE (→EE) version is uncertain, since one can easily imagine that the Chopinesque notation, either in [A] or in the proof copy of FE, could have been misinterpreted. Chopin could have, e.g. written the following, inaccurate slurs: , which in FE were interpreted in accordance with the tendency to adjust marks to regular rhythmic structures, e.g. bars, typical of engravers.
The crossed-out fragment of the initial, continuous slur visible in FC comes from the reviser of GE1, who thus clarified the slurring correction entered by Chopin.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Foreign hand additions in manuscripts , Authentic corrections of FC

b. 136-139

composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor

slentando in FC (→GE)

smorz. - - in FE (→EE)
..

Chopin entered slentando into FC (→GE). Similarly, Chopin added the smorz. - - indication present in FE (→EE) probably only just while proofreading this edition.
Therefore, both indications, of a similar meaning, can be regarded as equal variants.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Authentic corrections of FE , Authentic corrections of FC