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


b. 224

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

4 R.H. staccato dots in A, literal reading

R.H. wedges & dots in A, contextual interpretation

16 wedges in GE (→FE,EE,FESB)

8 wedges & dots suggested by the editors

16 wedges & dots, our alternative suggestion

..

As with bar 216, the interpretation of the staccato markings in A is problematic, since the difference between the particular markings, so clear in bars 208-211 (wedges and dots), concerns only the size of the markings in this case – the dots over the 1st and 3rd semiquavers are clearly bigger than those over the 2nd and 4th ones. We consider it a consequence of carelessness and interpret it after the initial bars in this variation. In the main text we suggest adding respective markings in the L.H. part as well.
We regard the use of wedges only in the editions as a consequence of the arbitrary decision of the engraver of GE1. The addition of markings (wedges) in the 2nd half of the bar also seems unnecessary; we suggest the version with wedges and dots with necessary changes only as an alternative solution.  

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Wedges

b. 224

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

Different accents in A, contextual interpretation

Long accents in GE

No marks in FE (→EE1)

Short accents in EE2

..

In A the length of both accents is not much different, yet a comparison with analogous bar 228 and 230, as well as 311, 313 and 315, allows us to consider this difference to be significant, hence in the main text we first give a short accent and then a long one. In GE both marks were interpreted as long accents. The absence of the accents in FE (→EE1) proves that they were added to A later, after [FC] had been finished. In EE2 the marks were added on the basis of GE1, interpreting them as common, short accents. See also bar 226 and 228-230.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE

b. 224

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

..

As before, in the 2nd half of the bar Chopin did not write accidentals in the R.H. part in A (→GE1). This version was also repeated by FE1, while FE2 (→EE) added both naturals. GE2 added only the latter (a3), probably assuming that a  to a2 is not necessary, since in the 1st half of the bar there are naturals both to a1, written at the same pitch as the discussed note, and to a2.
The same applies to bar 226.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Accidentals in different octaves , GE revisions , FE revisions , Inaccuracies in A , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in FE

b. 224-225

composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt I

No fingering in A (→GEFE,EE1,IE)

Fingering in EE2

..

In the main text we do not include the inauthentic R.H. part fingering added by EE2.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions

b. 224-225

composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt IV

..

In the L.H. part in EE1 in bar 224 the text of the next bar was printed (without performance markings and the ledger line for the 2nd crotchet). It resulted in an erroneous, although acceptable in terms of pitch, text in bar 244 (c-c1-b-b1) and in vague and rather illogical three first crotchets in bar 225, which are a1-a2-g2. It is difficult to say how the performers playing from EE1 dealt with this version, hence we do not try to create a content transcription in this case, which would be purely hypothetical.
As far as the remaining sources are concerned, in GE (→FE,EE,IE) a flat to the 3rd crotchet in bar 224 (g) and a flat to the 2nd crotchet in bar 225 (c1) were added, omitted in A.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , Errors in EE , GE revisions , Inaccuracies in A