Issues : Omitted correction of an analogous place
b. 46-47
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
The pedalling of AF (→FE→EE) was deliberate at the time when it was being written – Chopin crossed out the at the end of b. 46. However, he did not repeat this version in any of the analogous pairs of bars (b. 54-55, 78-79 and 86-87), which may mean that he then forwent the two-bar pedal in those places. Therefore, in the main text we give the pedalling of the principal source, i.e. GE. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Corrections in A , Chopin's hesitations , Deletions in A , Omitted correction of an analogous place |
|||||
b. 48
|
composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione
..
The last note of the 1st semiquaver triplet is written in A1 as c3. This puzzling notation – later in the sequence, a respective note an octave lower is already written as d2 (without the necessary , which is a typical Chopinesque inaccuracy) – was initially also in b. 15, in which it was, however, changed by Chopin. Since all the sources coming from [A2] feature d3, we consider the presence of c3 to be an overlooked correction of one of the analogous places (a phenomenon known from many other pieces by Chopin), hence we reproduce this notation only in the graphic transcription of A1. In the remaining sources the notation is enharmonically homogeneous, yet also inaccurate – none of the sources includes the in the last triplet of the bar; in CJ and CK it is also the lowering d3 to d3 that is missing, whereas in CB there are no naturals in this bar. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Omitted correction of an analogous place , Inaccuracies in JC |
|||||
b. 48
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
The chord with an additional b1 note we encounter in the sources is most probably Chopin's mistake, which is supported by the following arguments:
Taking into account the above, in all five places we give a chord without b1. In EE2 (→EE3) an inverse revision was performed, i.e. all the discussed places include a four-note chord. category imprint: Editorial revisions |
|||||
b. 49
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 19, Prelude in E♭ major
..
The main text – the 8th g quaver – comes from A (→FC→GE1,→FE→EE). However, the analysis of the corrections visible in A in the final section of the Prelude leads to the conclusion that it may be the uncorrected initial version and that the intended note was a b, like in analogous b. 57. Chopin changed the pitch of the middle triplet notes in 12 places in b. 49-66, out of which 6 times from g to b in the broken E major chord. In this situation, it is likely that the first bar of this section remained uncorrected inadvertently (Chopin would overlook a correction in one of a few similar places on a number of occasions – see, e.g. the Prelude in F Minor No. 8, b. 17). category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information issues: GE revisions , Omitted correction of an analogous place |
|||||
b. 50-51
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
The shorter slur in Atut (→FE→GE1→GE2) is the original marking. Initially, both slurs in the previous figure also encompassed the groups of three quavers only; however, they were then prolonged by Chopin. The slur in the L.H. in the discussed bars, written last, already encompasses the entire four-note motif. The fact of leaving the slur in the R.H. without extension must be the composer's inadvertence. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: EE revisions , Corrections in A , GE revisions , Omitted correction of an analogous place |