mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : No initial dynamic marking

b. 1

composition: Op. 10 No 10, Etude in A♭ major

 in A

No marking in FE (→GE,EE)
..

Omission of the  mark written in A may be considered as an ordinary error of the engraver of FE (→GE,EE). However, the consequence with which each mark indicating or strengthening the forte dynamics in the first 16 bars of the Etude (the first  appears together with the new key in bar 17) suggests a possibility of them being removed by Chopin or at least his acceptance of their absence. In this case in the main text we leave the version of editions without determining the starting level of dynamics for bars 1-8. Cf. notes to bars 8 and 16. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: No initial dynamic marking , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 1

composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt I

in GC & GE2

No marking in FE (→EE) & GE1
..

The absence of  in FE (→EE) must be considered an inaccuracy of notation. Most likely, it is a non-corrected oversight of the engraver, although one cannot entirely exclude the possibility that the sign was added by Chopin in GC. In turn, no  in GE1 is a patent oversight. See also bars 5 and 18-19.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: No initial dynamic marking , Errors in GE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections in GC

b. 1

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

..

In this case, the missing dynamic marking at the beginning of the piece, quite rare in Chopin's pieces, indicates, according to us, dynamics in between  and . In order to mark such dynamics, Chopin would use the m.v. (mezza voce) abbreviation; however, he was reluctant to do it at the beginning of the piece – cf. the Impromptu in A Major, Op. 29. 

category imprint: Source & stylistic information

issues: No initial dynamic marking

b. 1

composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor

No indication in AI & GE

mezza voce in AF (→FE→EE)

Our variant suggestion
..

It is impossible to state whether the omission of the dynamic marking in GE was intentional without [AG]. Due to the above reason, in the main text we include mezza voce from AF (→FE→EE) in a variant form.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: No initial dynamic marking

b. 1

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

in FC (→GE)

legato in FE (→EE)

Our variant suggestion
..

It is difficult to say how the difference in the indications at the beginning of the piece occurred. As legato was not being removed in FC, it was probably added by Chopin in the stage of proofreading FE or to the basis thereof. One of these scenarios presented an opportunity for a possible removal of , which in FC seems to have been written in Fontana's hand. Due to the above, in the main text we suggest it in a variant form (in brackets). See also bars 13 and 33.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: No initial dynamic marking , Authentic corrections of FE