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. 293

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

Fingering in A

No fingering in FC (→GE) & FE (→EE)
..

The digit 1, which in this context means that the f note should be taken over by the L.H., was ignored both by the copyist and the engraver of FE. A similar situation can be found in analogous b. 395, which makes us assume that Chopin could have added those digits in A already after having drawn up FC. See also b. 374. This is the only example of a silent takeover of a tied note by the other hand by means of fingering in Chopin's output. In a few other situations, the takeover was indicated by a corresponding rhythmic notation (the Nocturne in E major, Op. 62 No. 2, b. 35 & 73) or by a combination of vertical slurs before the chord (the Sonata in B minor, I mov., b. 103).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Errors of FC

b. 293

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

..

In A there are visible corrections and crossings-out in the R.H. part. Chopin tried a two-part notation there, probably the same as or similar to the one in b. 374.

category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Corrections in A , Deletions in A

b. 293

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

..

In the sources there is no  over the  mark, which is a patent inaccuracy, certainly repeated after [A].

category imprint: Interpretations within context

issues: Omission of current key accidentals

b. 293

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

in GE

No sign in FE (→EE)
..

The additional trill in GE is most probably a mistake by the engraver, who placed  a crotchet too early and either did not notice his mistake or forgot to remove the wrong mark. Anyways, the trill was absent in [A] – this bar was not written out in the manuscripts, but marked in an abridged manner as a repetition of b. 60, in which there is no trace of that trill. Moreover, there is no convincing evidence of Chopin proofreading GE1. Nevertheless, we have to admit that such a diversification of the last appearance of a repeated phrase would fit into the Chopinesque style.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE

b. 293-294

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

Slur to end of bar 293 in GE

Slur to bar 294 in FE (→EE)
..

Like in b. 60-61, in the main text we give the shorter slur of GE; however, the version of FE (→EE) may be considered equal.

category imprint: Differences between sources