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. 588

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

..

In EE1 the bottom note of the L.H. crotchet is an erroneous A1. The mistake was initially also in FE, in which, however, it was corrected during the proofreading, perhaps by Chopin's orders. The mistake was also rectified in EE2 (→EE3).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE , Errors repeated in EE

b. 588-620

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

2 times two & 2 times one dot in A

1 dot in FE (→EE)

4 times 2 dots in GE
..

Differently than in the two previous appearances of this theme (b. 5-37 and 137-169), in b. 588, 596, 612 and 620 there are no wedges at all in A. In turn, Chopin twice introduced separate marks for the L.H., which we consider to be determinant for the entire fragment. The use of double marking could have been related to the presence of longer, tied notes in the preceding motifs. The same unification was introduced in GE, whereas the notation of FC and FE (→EE) has to be regarded as inaccurate or erroneous.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Errors in FE , GE revisions , Wedges , Inaccuracies in FC

b. 589-596

composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor

No markings in EE

Pedalling in GC (→GE) & FE
..

No pedalling in these bars in EE is most probabbly a trace of the original version of this part.

category imprint: Differences between sources

b. 589

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

2 noteheads in FE (→EE)

1 notehead in GE
..

Both notations are almost equivalent; however, in exposition Chopin changed the former to the latter, formally less strict yet simpler and thus more explicit, in several dozen bars (see bars 257-263). In the further part of recapitulation, it is also the latter that prevails; hence we consider this place an example of an overlooked proofreading of an analogous place and we include the change introduced in GE in the main text. See also bars 601-603.   

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: GE revisions , Omitted correction of an analogous place

b. 589-590

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

Long accent in A (→FC,FE)

Short accent in GE1 & EE

in GE2 (→GE3)

 suggested by the editors
..

In accordance with the analysis of the Chopinesque  or  marks in this and analogous pairs of bars (see b. 6-7), in the main text we give an averaged, more or less one-bar  hairpin. According to us, all hairpins, regardless of their actual length, are to be interpreted as long accents.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions , EE inaccuracies