mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Scope of dynamic hairpins

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. 5

composition: Op. 28 No. 6, Prelude in B minor

 in A (contextual interpretation) & GE

  in FC

  in FE

  in EE

No marking in CGS
..

Just like in the similar situations in b. 1 and 3, we believe that it is the top arm of the  mark in A that is more reliable. In FC Fontana averaged the length of the mark, which is one of possible solutions. We consider the mark in GE, slightly shorter than in FC, to be compliant with our interpretation of A. The mark of FE, stretched out, so that it covers an entire bar (and inaccurately reproduced in EE), is most probably a revision.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins , EE inaccuracies , FE revisions

b. 5

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

  in A, contextual interpretation

  in GE (→FE,FESB)

  in EE
..

In A, the pair of dynamic hairpins was written as close as possible to the top voice so that it was clear that it concerned this very voice; the slightly shortened  mark is a result of lack of space. For reasons of clarity, in the main text we move the marks over the stave. In GE (→FE,FESB) the  mark was prolonged, which could be considered acceptable; however, as a consequence, the mark seems to concern the R.H. bottom voice too, which is exactly what Chopin wanted to avoid in A. In the version of EE, the original notation is distorted even more (due to lack of access to A).

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , EE inaccuracies , Inaccuracies in A

b. 5-6

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

 in A, contextual interpretation

in GE (→FE)

in EE

in FESB
..

In A, the short  mark is placed in b. 6; however, since it reaches only the 1st crotchet in that bar, it is obvious that it concerns the f1-g1 step between the bars, which we give in the main text. The versions of editions are based on the interpretation of that mark performed by GE1, in which its right-hand ending is led to the 2nd beat of the bar, which has no basis in the notation of A. In spite of minor differences in the range of the marks in the editions, we regard them as different, since each may suggest a slightly different beginning or ending of the crescendo, while the mark in FESB actually resembles a reversed accent.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , EE inaccuracies , Inaccuracies in A

b. 6

composition: Op. 29, Impromptu in A♭ major

..

The crescendo hairpins are marked slightly different in each of the sources. The right-hand end of the hairpins in A is unclear. Comparison with analogous bars and FE and EE versions (out of which one is most probably based on a different autograph), enables considering A's notation as inaccurate. We harmonise the notation according to analogous places.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins

b. 6

composition: Op. 26 No 1, Polonaise in C♯ minor

 in A (→FE→GE1, first time)

 in FE (→GE1), first time & in GE2 (→GE3→GE4→GE5)

 in EE
..

The sources differ in the range of  hairpins. Taking into account various possibilities of interpretation of the not too carefully written signs in A (also in analogous bar 31) and a possibility of Chopin proofreading of FE (at the reappearance of this bar in the written repetition of bars 1-12), all three variants of the range of this sign can be considered to be potentially corresponding to Chopin's intention. In the main text we give the most possible interpretation of the hairpins of A.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions , Inaccuracies in A