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. 320

composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor

 in EE, FE and GE1

No marking in GC & GE2
..

Since there is  in both EE and FE, its lack in GC must be the copyist's omission. Therefore it is awkward to find  in GE1. It may well be an error or revision as the marking was later removed from GE2. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Errors of GC

b. 320

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

Rhythm in A, literal interpretation

Rhythm in A, probable interpretation

Rhythm in A, interpretation suggested by the editors

GE1 (→FE→EE), contextual interpretation, GE2
..

The first note in the top voice in A (→GE1→FE→EE) is an erroneous double dotted quaver. Moreover, the assignment of the middle note in the 1st chord is unclear; e2 – the head, devoid of a stem, could be combined with a2 in the top voice (as in the previous bar) or with d2 in the bottom one (as in analogous bar 170). The editions repeated the layout of the previous bar, at the same time assimilating the value of e2 with a2. The editors of mUltimate Chopin are inclined to the second possibility, suggesting in the main text a solution fully analogous with the version from the exposition.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Rhythmic errors , Errors of A , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in FE , Errors repeated in EE

b. 320-321

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

Wedge in bar 321 in FE (→EE)

No mark in GE

Wedges in bars 320-321 suggested by the editors
..

The presence of wedge only for the second time (in bar 321), as it is in FE (→EE), is to be considered an inaccuracy, according to us. Chopin put the mark in this bar perhaps due to the missing hand transfer, but even then, it would not mean that he envisaged a different articulation for the 1st quaver in bar 320. However, most probably, the difference came into being by accident, as a result of inadvertence of Chopin himself or of the engraver. Taking that into account, in the main text we add a wedge in bar 320. An overlooked wedge also in bar 321 is most probably a mistake of GE.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Errors in GE

b. 320-321

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

..

In each of three analogous bars (bars 319-321), the sources feature a cautionary  before the 1st semiquaver of the 3rd beat. According to us, when the figure is repeated, in bars 320-321, the marks are no more necessary.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

issues: Cautionary accidentals

b. 320

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

Short accents in FE (→GE)

Vertical accents in EE
..

It is difficult to guess what kind of factors influenced EE for arbitrarily changing, only in this bar, 3 accents over b3 to vertical ones.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions