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. 248

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

Continuous slur in FE

New slur in GE & EE
..

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , EE inaccuracies

b. 248

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

Fingering written into FEH

No teaching fingering
..

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FEH

b. 248

composition: Op. 23, Ballade in G minor

..

In A one can see a deleted  mark, more or less under the b1 semiquaver.

category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Corrections in A , Deletions in A

b. 248

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

..

In A Chopin overlooked the  lowering g2 to g2 (yet he wrote a  to the next note!). The patent mistake was repeated only in FE1.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

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

b. 248

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

..

In A one can see traces of removal (erasure) of the slurs combining each of the grace notes with the respective main notes. Perhaps Chopin did not want to suggest an unisono performance of this bar (with tenth leaps in both hands), as he allowed for the possibility of playing the e-e1 octave with the R.H., while the C-c one with the L.H.

category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Corrections in A