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. 372-374

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

..

In the main text, we add cautionary flats before e1 in bars 372 and 374.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

b. 373

composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor

Rhythm in EE & FE

Rhythm in GC (→GE)
..

Both rhythmical variations are most likely authentic. The fact that  appears just once in GC (→GE) may be linked to increased number of accents on a notes (in double octaves) beginning with b. 360 (also the ones added in b. 374). For the main text we adopt - here and in all the corresponding bars - the FE version as most probably the latest one.

(in GC in LH there is a notation error of the first octave - see previously annotation)

category imprint: Differences between sources

b. 373

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

 in A & GE2

No marking in GE1 (→FE)

> in EE
..

GE1 (→FE) overlooked , which is a patent mistake. The sign was added in GE2, whereas in EE –  and an accent (see bars 369-375), same as in the adjacent bars.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in GE , GE revisions

b. 373-374

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

d2 repeated in FE (→EE)

d2 tied in GE
..

The notation of FE is unclear – in bar 374, opening a new line of text, an ending of a slur that was probably reaching the top note of the d2-b2 sixth was printed (the slur is inaccurate, it cannot be ruled out that it was supposed to apply to the bottom note), yet in bar 373, there is no slur suggesting continuation in the next bar. GE and EE specified the notation differently:

  • in GE, the fragment of the curved line in bar 374 was considered a tie of d2, and we consider that interpretation to be correct (cf. the unquestionable notation of analogous bars 377-378);
  • EE adopted a natural, at first sight, interpretation of the curved line as a motivic slur (we also consider it to be the text of FE); when interpreted so, the last d2 in bar 373 is not tied to the next bar​​.

Moreover, if we assume that the slur in the 2nd half of bar 373 was inaccurately reproduced and is too short, the discussed fragment of the slur in bar 374 may be considered an ending of that slur. We discuss this and other issues related to slurs and phrase marks in a separate note.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions

b. 373-374

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

2 slurs in FE (→EE)

Slur in bar 373 in GE1 (→GE2)

No slurs in GE3

Slur suggested by the editors
..

In FE, the slurring of these bars is inaccurate – the slur in the 2nd half of bar 373 ends between the penultimate and the last semiquaver, whereas in bar 374, on a new line of text, there is a slur, reaching the 1st quaver, suggesting continuation from the previous bar. We consider the interpretation adopted in EE to be the text of FE, while the version of GE may be considered an alternative interpretation. As the 2nd triplet in bar 373 left without slur is also questionable, in the main text we suggest a slurring modelled after analogous bars 377-378.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Errors in GE , Annotations in FEH