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. 254-259

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

Fingering written into FEH

No fingering in FE (→GE)

Fontana's fingering in EE in bar 258
..

Fontana's fingering in EE is most probably compliant with the one entered in FEH, although the indications themselves do not overlap. Providing indications only just in the second (identical) passage is noteworthy – it is a frequent phenomenon among the Chopinesque teaching entries.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Annotations in FEH

b. 254-255

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

..

FE is missing naturals before the 6th semiquaver in bars 254 and 255. The patent inaccuracies were corrected in GE and EE. There is a similar situation in bar 258.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

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

b. 254

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

..

We add cautionary flats before d2, g2 and g1 in the main text. The sources only have ​​​​​​​ before d1.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

issues: Cautionary accidentals

b. 254

composition: Op. 22, Polonaise

..

In the main text we add a cautionary  before e2. The accidental was also added in GE3.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: GE revisions

b. 254

composition: Op. 23, Ballade in G minor

..

In all editions, this bar opens a new line, and there is a slur reaching the first L.H. note (B), which seems to be a continuation of the slur from the preceding bar. However, there is no L.H. part slur in the previous bar, which points to a mistake, most probably when prolonging the R.H. slur. Considering the division of the text into lines we adopted in our transcriptions, a reasonable reproduction of this notation is impossible.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in EE