mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Scope of dynamic hairpins

b. 285

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

 in FE

Shifted  in GE

Longer  in EE
..

Since the obvious destination of the  hairpin is the  in the next bar, in the main text, we extend the mark present in FE correspondingly. An identical retouch was introduced already in EE, whereas in GE, the mark was moved (without extending it), so that it reaches the end of the bar.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions , Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions

b. 286

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

 in FE (→EE,GE1→GE2)

Longer  in GE3
..

Differently than in the previous bar, the extension of the  hairpin is not justified here, since the destination of the crescendo was not explicitly indicated – in bar 287, there is no . After all, a shorter mark does not determine the performance manner – one can consider it a suggestion that the climax should occur slightly earlier to prepare the upcoming  to a certain extent; however, one can also consider sempre cresc. to be valid until the end of the bar, irrespective of the range of the  mark.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions

b. 293-295

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

Shorter  in A

Different  in GE1 (→FE)

Longer  in EE & GE2
..

We give the  hairpin in the main text on the basis of A. It is the only version whose authenticity does not raise any doubts. The musically sensible version of GE1 (→FE) may be considered an equal variant; however, it may be a result of the engraver's inaccuracy. In the version of EE and GE2 one can see an arbitrary attempt to unify the notation of GE1 (→FE) or another inaccuracy.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of GE

b. 294-295

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

No sign in A (→FE→EE) & GE1

 in FC, probable interpretation

in GE2 (→GE3)
..

In the main text we give the  hairpin entered by Chopin into FC (→GE). The exact range of the mark is questionable: it is written in b. 294, the last one in line, and clearly goes beyond the bar line; however, there is no continuation thereof in b. 295. We assume that it marks the same range as in analogous b. 375-376 & 396-397, in which the hairpins in FC were also added by Chopin. GE1 omitted the mark (the engraver could have been uncertain how to interpret the described notation), whereas GE2 (→GE3) provided the hairpin with a longer range, modelled after b. 273-274, which seems less justified, since:

  • the missing continuation of the mark in a new line suggests only a slight extension, and not a one-bar extension;
  • Chopin wrote a longer mark only one, whereas shorter – twice.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins , Errors in GE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FC

b. 297

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

Shorter  in A & EE

No sign in GE1 (→FE)

Longer  in GE2
..

The absence of the  hairpin in GE1 (→FE) may be an oversight of the engraver or Chopin's proofreading – see bars 293-295. The sign in EE may be a part of a revision unifying the markings after analogous bars 293 and 295. The sign in GE2 was added taking into consideration A, yet the range of the  was repeated after GE1 in bar 293.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of GE