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. 360

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

New slur in FE (literal reading→EE)

2 slurs in FE, contextual interpretation

Continued slur in GE
..

In FE, the slur begins on the first note, despite the fact that in the previous bar, ending the previous page, there is a slur started on the last quaver. Since the correctness of that slur does not raise doubts – after 7 quavers marked staccato, the last one was provided with a slur and not a dot – we assume that it is the beginning of the bar under discussion that is inaccurate. Taking into account that overlapping slurs occur quite frequently in the Rondo, e.g. in a similar situation in bars 219-220, we adopt such a solution as the text of FE. The amendment in GE may be regarded as an alternative version. The version in EE, which considered the slur in bar 359 to be erroneous and omitted it, is almost certainly arbitrary. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions

b. 360-368

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

after 4th quaver in FE (→EE)

on 4th quaver in GE
..

In GE,  is under the 4th quaver. It is an inaccuracy resulting from an inept layout of text – the last quaver is placed next to the bar line. There is a similar situation in bar 364 and 368 although in the latter the inaccurate placing of the marking cannot be explained by the layout. See also bars 384-385.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions

b. 360

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

No indications in FE (→GE,EE1)

dolce in EE2 (→EE3)
..

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions

b. 360

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

..

The notation of accidentals in FE is inaccurate – naturals are missing before the first d1 and before d3 and g2 in the last triplet, whereas the superfluous ​​​​​​​ was placed before b1 in the 2nd half of the bar. In the remaining editions, all necessary accidentals were added, while EE also removed the superfluous ones.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals

b. 360

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

No mark in FE (→EE,GE1→GE2)

Accent in GE3

Same accent suggested by the editors
..

We suggest adding an accent on the 4th quaver in the bar on the basis of a comparison with analogous bar 368. Accentuating thirds gives passages a virtuoso touch and refers to the characteristic rhythm of krakowiak . The accent was added in GE3.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: GE revisions