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. 255

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

b-b in A, amended version

b-b in A (original version, contextual interpretation) & GE (→FE,EE,IE)
..

The version of the 2nd half of the bar in A, pianistically and harmonically questionable, is probably an example of a "correction" (the change of  to , probably performed in a hurry), which resulted in a greater mistake than the one that was supposed to be corrected – the absence of the  restoring b on the 5th quaver. The initial notation reveals that Chopin approached this place in the same way as he did with the similar situations in bar 254 (as well as 250 and 253), where the flats, although undoubtedly necessary, are only of a cautionary nature.
In GE (→FE,EE,IE) the initial text was restored, supplemented by the necessary . 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Corrections in A , Errors resulting from corrections , GE revisions , Foreign hand additions in manuscripts , Deletions in A

b. 256

composition: Op. 43, Tarantella

 
 
..

In FE (→IE) in the chor of the first beat of RH the bottom  note of the chord - b1 - must have been overlooked.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE

b. 256

composition: Op. 43, Tarantella

..

In all the sources redundant  was added before g2 in RH.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

issues: Cautionary accidentals

b. 256

composition: Op. 42, Waltz in A♭ major

g2 in FE0 (→EE)

f2 in FE & GE
..

The version of FE0 (→EE) with g2 as the bottom note of the first of the pairs of the quavers is most probably erroneous. In the base text to FE and in FEG (→GE) Chopin changed this g2 to f2, yet in FE the correction was misunderstood, hence the flat was also copied, which resulted in a f2. Chopin corrected this new error in FEJ. In this situation, the presence of the original version in EE must be considered as a result of an oversight of proofreading or the engraver's inattention. In the main text we give the text written by Chopin's hand in FEG and FEJ.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Errors in FE , Authentic corrections of FE , Annotations in FEJ , Authentic corrections of GE

b. 256

composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I

..

There is no  before the top note of the 7th third in A. The patent oversight was corrected already in GE1 (→FE→EE, →GE2).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

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