mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Hairpins denoting continuation

b. 12-13

composition: Op. 25 No 2, Etude in F minor

No signs in AT & AW

One sign  in CDP

Two signs  in GC (→GE), FE & EE
..

It is unclear whether according to Chopin diminuendo in these bars was supposed to be divided in two sections or not. In GC and CDP, bar 13 opens a new line of the text, hence it was most probably the same in [A]. In such a situation, two subsequent  or  signs were treated as equal to one, longer hairpins in Chopin's times. As two out of three sources based probably on [A] (GC and EE or FE) have divided signs and only one (CDP) – combined, in the main text we adopt the first notation.
However, most probably these bars, independently from the notation, are supposed to be embraced with one diminuendo wave, as it was unambiguously indicated in analogous bars 31-32.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , Hairpins denoting continuation

b. 12-13

composition: Op. 50 No. 1, Mazurka in G major

No sign in Afrag

 in A1 (literal reading→FE1)

 in A1, contextual interpretation

in GE & EE
..

According to us, the  hairpin written in A1 is to be interpreted as ending before the  indication in b. 13. It is most likely that Chopin first wrote the top arm (perhaps before entering ) and then indicated the end of the mark with the ending of the bottom arm. Such an interpretation is confirmed by the mark of A1 in b. 36 and the notation of GE based on [A2] (in GE2 the mark was shortened with respect to GE1, which does not influence its meaning). In FE the mark was interpreted according to the length of the top arm; moreover, FE2 reproduced it inaccurately. It remains unclear how come that the mark was shortened in EE – perhaps by analogy with b. 36. 

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , Corrections in A , EE inaccuracies , Hairpins denoting continuation , Inaccuracies in A

b. 15-16

composition: Op. 25 No 4, Etude in A minor

 in A (→FE)

 in FC (→GE)

Two  in EE

 in EE, possible interpretation
..

The presence of two  signs in EE may be explained as a revision, in which the sign in bar 16, compatible with the remaining sources, was completed with hairpins in bar 15 following bar 7. However, both signs can be authentic and it cannot be excluded that they are to be interpreted as one longer diminuendo.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Hairpins denoting continuation

b. 17-18

composition: Op. 28 No. 4, Prelude in E minor

No sign in As, FE (→EE1) & CGS

in A

in FC

 in GE, contextual interpretation

in EE2
..

The high position of the L.H. chords and the resulting lack of space between the staves contributed to inaccuracies and mistakes in the reproduction of the  hairpin – it was moved in FC (→GE, inaccurately) and overlooked in FE (→EE1). The mark in EE2 was added on the basis of GE1, overlooking its ending at the beginning of b. 18. In GE, there is a complete  mark at the end of the line (in b. 17), in spite of the fact that b. 18 contains its ending in the form of a new  mark – in times of Chopin, the contemporary, more accurate notation of such divided hairpins was not generally used yet. The absence of the mark in CGS is one of the arguments supporting the fact that the copy was prepared on the basis of FE.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , Inaccuracies in FC , Hairpins denoting continuation

b. 20-21

composition: Op. 45, Prelude in C♯ minor

 in FE1 (→EE) & GE

Two hairpins in FE2
..

In the main text we give the  mark stretching across one and a half bars, according to FE1 (→EE) and GE. The notation of FE2, although it meant the same in the context, can nonetheless be treated as an alternative version.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Hairpins denoting continuation