mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Errors of JC

b. 5-6

composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major

..

In JC, there are no flats lowering a and a1 into a and a1. The undeniable oversight of Chopin in [A] (→JC) is revealed by the cautionary  before a in bar 7. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Cautionary accidentals , Omission of current key accidentals , Errors of JC

b. 5

composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major

Rhythm in JC read literally

JC (contextual interpretation), PE & EF
..

Rhythmic values in the part of the R.H. in JC are not erroneous, yet a mistake of the copyist while writing such a rhythm which is in the remaining sources is more plausible. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors of JC

b. 6

composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major

Rhythm in JC (literal reading)

Rhythm in JC (interpretation) and EF

PE
..

The rhythm in EF (equal quavers at the end of the bar) and – despite a mistake – in JC most probably corresponds to the notation of [AI]. In [A] (→PE), which is undoubtedly a later version, Chopin homogenised the rhythm of the 3rd beat of the bar in bars 1-3 and 5-7.   

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors of JC

b. 9

composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major

..

In JC, FEF, and PE, the 5th quaver f is not extended to the value of a crotchet. It is certainly a mistake (the notation's inaccuracy), as the necessity to extend stems from the presence of the tie sustaining this note to the minim f in bar 10. Moreover, in JC, the last quaver, f1, is written erroneously in a two-part form. FEF has a correct notation.

category imprint: Source & stylistic information

issues: Errors of JC , Errors in PE , Errors in Fontana's editions , Fontana's revisions

b. 10-18

composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major

Quaver d1 in JC

Quaver d1 in EF

Minim in PE
..

The extension of the note d1 in bars 10 and 18, marked only in PE, is a typical Chopin's ploy. In bar 18 of this edition, an equivalent notation was applied, showing exactly the voices' coincidence. The notation may have resulted from a misunderstanding of the notation of [A], hence in both places we give the simplest notation used in bar 10.

The lower note of the sixth, f, is a quaver in JC, which is a patent inaccuracy in relation to the tie sustaining it into f on the 3rd beat of the bar (see the next remark). According to us, it is yet probable that it corresponds to the notation of [AI] and illustrates the process of gradual improvement of the notation from bare quavers to the precise notation of ties of some of the notes. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors of JC