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. 361-364

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

Slur to bar 364 in A (→FE→EE) & GE2 (→GE3)

Slur to end of bar 360 in FC (→GE1)
..

The missing ending of the slur in a new line must be a mistake of the copyist. The error was corrected in GE2 (→GE3), most probably on the basis of analogy with b. 463-466.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Errors of FC

b. 361

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

in A

No  in GE (→FE,EE,FESB)
..

The omission of the  hairpin coupled with the cresc. indication was an arbitrary decision of the engraver of GE1.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions

b. 361

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

Short accents in A (→GE→FE)

Vertical accents in EE
..

As before (bars 343 and 347 and bar 357), in EE the horizontal accents were arbitrarily changed to vertical ones.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions

b. 362

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

Fingering written into FED

Fingering written into FEH

Our alternative suggestion

No fingering in FE (→GE)

Fontana's fingering in EE
..

The fingering of FEH determines one of possible continuations of the Chopinesque entry in FED, whereas Fontana's fingering in FE – a different one. In the main text, we take into consideration the entry of FED only, defining the most important element of the passage's fingering – the thumb under. As an alternative solution, we suggest a combination of the fingering of FED with three digits of FEH, which could have been entered by Chopin.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Annotations in FED , Differences in fingering , Annotations in FEH

b. 362-363

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

..

FE is missing the necessary accidentals at the beginning of the last triplet in bar 362. Moreover, the  raising e1 to e1 in bar 363 is only just at the beginning of the last triplet. In turn, a  is unnecessarily repeated before e2 at the end of the 1st triplet in bar 363. The missing accidentals were added both in GE and EE; however, the revisions were inaccurate – the erroneous accidentals were not completely removed, while EE added even a new one, a  before d2 at the beginning of the 2nd triplet in bar 363. It is only GE3 that introduced a notation compliant with all contemporary standards. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , Cautionary accidentals