mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Errors resulting from corrections

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. 196

composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III

Faulty rhythm in FE

Reversed dotted rhythm in EE

Crotchets in GE

Other interpretation of rhythm in FE
..

There are three natural ways to add the rhythmic value in which the notation of FE is lacking; we give them as potentially compliant with Chopin's intention. Two of them were implemented already in the first editions. In the main text, we give the rhythm adopted in GE, which, according to us, is most likely due to the calming of the course of music (rallentando in the next bar) and due to the presence of that very rhythm in an analogous context in bar 440.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors resulting from corrections , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 197-198

composition: Op. 23, Ballade in G minor

Slur in A, GE & EE3

No slur in FE (→EE1→EE2)

Our variant suggestion
..

The missing slur in FE (→EE1→EE2) is almost certainly a mistake by the engraver. In GE and EE3, the slur was added probably on the basis of a comparison with analogous motifs. (In the case of GE it could have been one of the places possibly corrected by Chopin while proofreading the basis for that edition, while in the case of EE3 a repetition of the slur after GE cannot be excluded.)
In GE2, due to retouches, see b. 195-196, the part of the slur falling on b. 197 was overlooked (the placement of the slur over the bottom voice crotchets was also changed, among other things).

The slur of EE3 was probably added as a result of a comparison with analogous motifs, or perhaps on the basis of GE. 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Errors in FE , Errors resulting from corrections , Errors in GE

b. 201

composition: Op. 22, Polonaise

b2-a2 in FE

a2-g2 in GE & EE
..

Similarly as in the case of b. 57, the version of EE and GE is an earlier version of this place, left contrary to Chopin's intention. See also the note in b. 200.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Errors resulting from corrections , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 202-204

composition: Op. 38, Ballade in F major

1. Original version in A

2. Later version of A (→FE1,EE)

3. GC, contextual interpretation

GE

4. FE2 (→FE3)

Our variant suggestion
..

The ending of the Ballade has a few versions proving Chopin's hesitations. We present them below in a chronological order:

  1. The original version in A.
  2. The later version in A (→EE), added by Chopin under the deleted version No. 1. This version was copied to GC, where Chopin would then modify it (with an erroneous c1 instead of d1 in bar 203).
  3. The version of GC changed by Chopin. This version was adopted by GE by correcting the bottom note in bar 203 and adding an erroneous slur combining the grace note and the g minim.
  4. The version of FE2, corrected by Chopin.

As it can be seen, Chopin had two main concepts of the Ballade's endings, "open" and "close." According to us, it is the version No. 1 that presents the first of them in the most thoughtful manner, while in the case of the latter it is the version No. 4. In the main text we give the version No. 1, enriched with variant, characteristic for Chopin grace note added in GC.

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

issues: Corrections in A , Chopin's hesitations , Errors resulting from corrections , Terzverschreibung error , Deletions in A , Authentic corrections of FE , Errors of GC , Authentic corrections in GC

b. 206

composition: Op. 22, Polonaise

Accent in FE (→GE1,EE)

No mark in GE1a (→GE2→GE3)
..

Due to the graphic retouches of this fragment of the page in GE1a, the accent under the b2 quaver was overlooked, which was also repeated in GE2 (→GE3). 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors resulting from corrections , Errors in GE