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. 338

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

..

In FE (→GE), there are sharps (reminding?) before d2 and f2 on the 5th semiquaver of the bar. We remove them in the main text, since both notes (f2 and d3) are present in the previous bar. The marks were removed also in EE.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions , Cautionary accidentals , Last key signature sign

b. 338-339

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

FE (→EE)

GE
..

The version of GE, contrary to the orchestral part of FEorch (→GEorch) – in the last chord in bar 338, bassoon I, violas, oboe II and flute II do not have a b (in various octaves), but a c​​​​​​​, while in the 1st chord in bar 339, violins II, clarinets and oboe II have a f1(2) – is almost certainly completely erroneous. The traces visible in FE prove that those mistakes were originally committed in that edition, yet they were corrected in the last phase of proofreading.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of FE , Errors repeated in GE

b. 338-339

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

..

In bar 339, GE1 (→GE2) overlooked the dashes marking the range of crescendo. In GE3, the dashes were overlooked in both bars.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE

b. 338-347

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

Three-note slurs in A (literal reading→FE→EE)

Two- & three-note slurs in FC (→GE1)

Two-note slurs in GE2 (→GE3)
..

When interpreted literally, the slurs of A in b. 338-339 & 346-347 seem to be reaching the bass note in the next bar. However, according to us, it is an inaccuracy, a manner of writing slurs significantly going beyond the intended range, cf., e.g. the phrase marks in b. 320 (corrected) & 326 (see also the Mazurka in G Minor, Op. 24 No. 1, b. 21, 23-24). Due to the above reason, in the main text we give pianistically natural slurs, modelled after the ones Chopin wrote in analogous b. 440-441 & 448-449. Such a solution was introduced already in GE2 (→GE3). The first slur of FC (→GE1), which is shorter, is probably accidental: the copyist forgot to put the ending of the slur in a new line of the text.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , Embracing slurs , Inaccuracies in FC

b. 338

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

Notation in A

Notation in GE (→FE,EE)
..

In A the division of the L.H. part into voices is irregular and at times difficult to implement in print. It seems to have resulted from introducing changes (not entirely thought out) to the notation of the first two quavers – Chopin probably started from one-part notation , out of which he then separated the two top voices on the 1st beat. In this situation, the simpler version of GE (→FE,EE) is to be considered an improvement, although it is uncertain whether it comes from Chopin. Anyways, the composer did not question it while correcting the last quaver in FE – see the next note.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Corrections in A , GE revisions