mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Inaccuracies in GE

b. 4-12

composition: Op. 10 No 11, Etude in E♭ major

..

In A in bar 4 (and bar 12, which repeats this bar) the  hairpins embrace with their range the 2nd and 3rd chords in the bar. This is how it was more or less reproduced in FE, yet minor inaccuracies caused that in GE the sign in bar 12 was given a form of an accent, while in EE in both bars it was printed one quaver too early.

category imprint: Differences between sources

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

b. 4-12

composition: Op. 10 No 5, Etude in G♭ major

Long accents in A

Long accent in FE (→EE2)

Short accent & dots in GE

Two accents in EE3 (→EE4)
..

We consider the marks written in A under the chords in bars 4 and 12 as long accents. Only first of them was reproduced in FE (→EE2). In GE the sign in bar 4 became a common short accent and in bar 12 both chords were provided with staccato dots. In EE3 (→EE4) a short accent was added in bar 12. According to us, only the version of A is authentic.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions

b. 4

composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt II

..

FE (except for FE4) lacks in five necessary accidentals – naturals before d2 and b and sharps before f, f2 and g2. This patent inaccuracy certainly has its source in the notation of [A]. Similarly in GC, in which, however, Chopin added a  raising b to b. In GC (→GE) there are also no naturals before the last octave in the R.H. – it can be an oversight of the copyist or a later addition in [A]. In the remaining sources the signs were completed (all additions can be attributed to a revision): three were added in EE1 and FE4, four in GE; only EE2 includes the correct notation. Cf. bar 24.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals , FE revisions , Inaccuracies in GC , Authentic corrections in GC

b. 4-5

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

Slur up to bar 5 in A, EE & GE2

Slur in bar 4 in GE1 (→FE)
..

A shorter slur of GE1 is (together with the previous one) a clear example of carelessness presented by the engraver of GE1 at the time of handling the slurring written in A.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions

b. 4

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

Long accent in #Wf (→#Wn)

Short accent in EE
..

A precise differentiation between long and short accents, typical of Chopin's notation, and assigning them to the right or left hand is impossible due to the missing autograph and visible inaccuracies of the first editions. In FE, it is possible to observe differences between accents in some cases; it also applies to GE to a lesser extent. In turn, the reviser of EE reproduced almost all accents as short. It is impossible to clearly identify in which places the notation of FE reproduces Chopin's notation faithfully (which can also be imprecise) and in which ones the length of the accent results from a random event or an inaccuracy. We try to reproduce the composer's intention taking into account his habits in this respect, documented by sources in other compositions.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions; Source & stylistic information

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE