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. 296-306

composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor

Slurs in EE and FE

GC

GE
..

In GC (→GE) the slurs end in bars 298 and 306, respectively. For our main text we take the consistent slurring of EE and FE which we consider more grounded in the sources and more justified from the musical point of view. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GC

b. 296

composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor

..

 GC has the flat before the chord placed at the height of d1. We can come across similar inaccuracies in Chopin's own manuscripts as well. GE has the correct text that is evident from the context. 

category imprint: Source & stylistic information

issues: Accidental below/above the note , Inaccuracies in GC

b. 296-297

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

Slur to c3 in bar 297 in A & GE2

Slur to end of bar 296 in GE1 (→FE→EE)
..

The ending of the slur was reproduced in GE1 (→FE→EE) inaccurately, which was corrected in GE2.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions

b. 296

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

..

In the main text we add a cautionary  before b2.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

b. 296

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

..

A has an a1 as the last note in the L.H. It is almost certainly a mistake – cf. analogous figures in bars 300, 302 and 304-306. Mistakes in the number of ledger lines are the most frequent pitch errors committed by Chopin (excluding those related to the notation of accidentals). GE (→FE→EE) features the correct text, which can be ascribed to Chopin's proofreading or a fortunate mistake, since there are no visible traces of correction in print, whereas the note in A, despite three ledger lines, is written lower than the previous g1.
In the discussed place, there is a visible correction in A. The deletions are actually very precise, yet their placement allows us to indicate e1 and d1 as possibly crossed out original (or only erroneous) last two notes.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors resulting from corrections , Terzverschreibung error , Errors in the number of ledger lines , Errors of A , Authentic corrections of GE