mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description
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. 293

composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor

d2 in EE and FE

b1 in GC (→GE)
..

In GC, the 3rd quaver of the L.H. sounds as b1. At the same time we can see in the manuscript that it was corrected from a1. Taking into consideration the regularity of figuration in all the analogous places, it is hard not to treat the version of GC (→GE) as anything more than an error. Cf. the note to bar 294.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors of GC , Alterations in GC

b. 293

composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I

..

In the main text we add a cautionary  before e3.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

b. 293

composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I

..

When interpreted literally, the slur of A runs from the 3rd to the 14th demisemiquaver. The patent inaccuracy did not mislead the engraver of GE (→FE→EE), who embraced the whole group with the slur.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccurate slurs in A

b. 293-294

composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III

Shorter slurs in A (literal reading→GE1→FE)

Longer slurs in A (contextual interpretation)

Shorter slurs in both hands in EE

Longer slurs in both hands in GE2
..

The range of both slurs is vague in A – the first does not exceed the bar line, whereas in the second one, one can see a slur over the triplet. This is how they were interpreted in GE1 (→FE→EE). However, the slurs in subsequent, identical figures, extended in a few places, prove that Chopin wanted them to reach a crotchet on the 1st or the 3rd beat of bar 294 and analog. each time. We give this interpretation, introduced already in GE2, in the main text. The slurs in the L.H. added in EE and GE2 are an arbitrary revision both in these bars and in the entire section until bar 308 – see the note on bars 297-298.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , GE revisions

b. 293-295

composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III

Shorter  in A

Different  in GE1 (→FE)

Longer  in EE & GE2
..

We give the  hairpin in the main text on the basis of A. It is the only version whose authenticity does not raise any doubts. The musically sensible version of GE1 (→FE) may be considered an equal variant; however, it may be a result of the engraver's inaccuracy. In the version of EE and GE2 one can see an arbitrary attempt to unify the notation of GE1 (→FE) or another inaccuracy.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of GE