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. 11-12

composition: Op. 50 No. 1, Mazurka in G major

No markings in Afrag, A1, GE & EE

  in FE
..

In the main text we include the pedalling added by Chopin in the last phase of proofreading of FE. The same applies to b. 35-36 and 67-68.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Authentic corrections of FE

b. 11-15

composition: Op. 50 No. 2, Mazurka in A♭ major

No ornaments in A1 (→FE→EE)

Mordents in GE
..

Chopin could have added the mordents in b. 11 and 15 already in [A2] or only just in the proofreading of GE1 (→GE2). The same applies to b. 46 and 50 and 86 and 90.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Authentic corrections of GE

b. 11

composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione

One-part notation in A1, CJ, CK & CB

Two-part notation in EL
..

Separating the tenor voice must have been an arbitrary decision introduced in EL. According to us, it is likely that the author thereof was Kolberg, who added similar short motifs in the middle section of the Lento (b. 35-36 and 39-40).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Kolberg's revisions , Revisions in EL

b. 11-13

composition: Op. 28 No. 2, Prelude in A minor

..

In As one can see traces of corrections of the bottom note of the 2nd quaver in the 1st L.H. group in b. 11 and 13 and in the 2nd group in b. 12 (the remaining three groups of quavers are not written out in those bars). Chopin hesitated whether to write it as c or d. According to us, the corrections resulted in d in b. 11-12 and c in b. 13, and this is the notation we give as the text of As. It is worth noting that in both groups in b. 14 c was the first choice, hence it was not a result of corrections. In addition, while preparing a clean draft, Chopin opted for c in all those places.

category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Chopin's hesitations

b. 11-12

composition: Op. 28 No. 2, Prelude in A minor

in A

in FC & EE

No sign in FE1

in FE2

in GE

in CGS
..

The corrections and crossings-out visible in A reveal the changes performed both to the range and the position of the  hairpin in this place (As does not contain any dynamic markings). The initial mark, written between the staves, started between the 6th and 7th quavers in b. 10, which was changed by Chopin – he moved the beginning under the last quaver in that bar. Eventually, both versions were crossed out, and a new hairpin was written over the R.H. part, which we give in the main text. Although the new mark begins at the end of b. 10, both FC (→GE) and FE2 (→EE) placed its starting point only in b. 11 – these changes cannot come from Chopin, since he did not directly participate in the publication of the Preludes after having finished A. The longest mark of CGS is most probably an arbitrary interpretation of the hairpin of FE2 by the copyist. 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Errors in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , Corrections in A , Deletions in A , FE revisions , Inaccuracies in FC