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. 226-227

composition: Op. 19, Bolero

Slurs in FE
 

No slurs in GE & EE1

Slurs in EE2 (→EE3)
..

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , EE inaccuracies

b. 226

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

..

The G note was added in the proofreading of FE, which is indicated by the diagonal quaver beam and reversed note head of this note. The change was certainly performed on Chopin's request. There is a similar situation in analogous bar 585.

category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Authentic corrections of FE

b. 226-227

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

3 wedges in FE (→EE)

3 staccato dots in GE
..

GE has staccato dots instead of 3 wedges in the R.H. It is an arbitrary revision.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions

b. 226

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

Fingering written into FED

No teaching fingering
..

We give the Chopinesque fingering entered in FED in the main text.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FED

b. 226

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

No indication in GC & FE (→EE1)

 in GE & EE2
..

The  indication here results from a mistake by the engraver of GE1, who interpreted thus the  sign hurriedly written in GC. The erroneous indication was repeated in EE2.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in GE , Inaccuracies in GC