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. 220

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

..

FEH includes here two diagonal crosses – characteristic marks of Chopinesque teaching. Each time, their meaning remains in the sphere of more or less justified speculation.

category imprint: Source & stylistic information

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FEH

b. 220

composition: Op. 22, Polonaise

..

Just like in b. 76, the dyad of the bottom voice (e1-a1) in FE is a crotchet. The patent mistake was corrected both in GE and EE.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions , Rhythmic errors

b. 220

composition: Op. 22, Polonaise

e1-a1 in FE (→EE)

f1-a1 in GE
..

The version of GE, although harmonically possible, must be a mistake. It is proven by the version of FE (→EE), compliant with the incontestable text of analogous b. 76.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE

b. 220-221

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

..

In [A], there was neither  raising g3 to g3 in the last crotchet of bar 220 nor  raising e3 to e3 at the beginning of bar 221. These obvious inaccuracies were only corrected in some sources –  was added in FE4, GE and EE2, and  in FE2 (→EE,FE3→FE4).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals , FE revisions , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in EE

b. 220

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

Slur from 1st quaver in GE1 & FE (→EE)

Slur from 2nd quaver in GE2 
..

The earlier start of the slur probably resulted from an inaccurate notation of [A]. A new phrase clearly begins on the 2nd quaver, which is confirmed by the slurring of all analogous places – b. 200 as well as 141, 143, 161, 163 and 202.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A