mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Balakirev's revisions

b. 31

composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione

Quavers b & a in A1 & CK

Crotchet b & quaver a in CJ

Quavers b & g in CB, contextual interpretation

Crotchet b in EL

Crotchet b & quaver  a suggested by the editors
..

Extending the b quaver to a crotchet, which results in a g(a)-b third at the end of the bar, is probably a specification of notation introduced in [A2]. The additional stem is absent in CK (→CB), whereas in EL this note is a crotchet, since the last quaver was omitted. It is almost certainly Kolberg's revision, suggesting his knowledge of the authentic notation of [A2], although it had not been reproduced in CK – he could have considered the additional stem to be a correction of the text of the last beat of the bar. The aforementioned third leads to a-c1 in the next bar, which is slightly obscured by the Chopinesque simplified orthography (in CB the last quaver is written as g; however, the  raising b to b in the penultimate one was overlooked). In the main text we add a cautionary  to the Chopinesque a.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions; Corrections & alterations

issues: Kolberg's revisions , Balakirev's revisions

b. 32

composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione

Rhythm & metres in A1, contextual interpretation

Rhythm & metres in CJ

Rhythm & metres in CK

Rhythm & metres in CB

Rhythm & metres in EL

Rhythm & metres suggested by the editors
..

The notation of this bar in CJ and CK may be misleading – it contains 5 crotchets, divided 2+3 with a simultaneous change of tempo so that the 3 crotchets of the second half of the bar last as long as the 2 in the first half. It is evident when one has access to A1, in which the origin and hence the correctness of such an interpretation directly results from the polymetric notation of the 1st half of the bar continued from the previous bars. However, the notation of the aforementioned copies does not offer any hints as to such an interpretation of this notation. Therefore, we introduce additions specifying the structure of the bar and the relationship between its parts. It was also Balakirev and Kolberg that introduced changes striving in this direction. The former divided the bar in two in his copy, whereas the latter signalised the structure of the bar in EL by putting two small lines between the 2nd and 3rd beats.

The dotted rhythm on the 2nd beat of the bar is probably a mistake of the copyist – see the note in the 2nd half of the bar. 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Kolberg's revisions , Balakirev's revisions

b. 32

composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione

..

CK is lacking in the  raising f1 to f1. This patent mistake was not repeated in CB; the remaining sources also contain the correct text.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Balakirev's revisions , Errors in CK

b. 34-35

composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione

No indication in A1 & CB

sempre piano in CJ

sempre  in CK

sempre  in EL
..

In the main text we adopt the notation of CK, actually equivalent to CJ, yet more natural to interpret. It is difficult to say whether the absence of the indication in CB is an oversight or – which seems to be more likely – a purposeful omission (the indication may be regarded as superfluous after  in b. 33). The version of EL may be considered alternative in relation to our interpretation of CK – it was the beginning of sempre that was deemed reliable, whereas in our transcription we kept the placement of .  

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Balakirev's revisions

b. 44

composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione

No fingering in A1, CJ, CK & EL

Fingering in CB
..

There are no indications that Balakirev disposed of an authentic message concerning the fingering. It is almost certainly his own suggestion.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Balakirev's revisions