mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description
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. 2-6

composition: Op. 27 No 2, Nocturne in D♭ major

No slurs in the left hand in A (→GE→FE)

The slurs arbitrarily added in EE
..

In EE, slurs were added in the left hand in those bars. This is definitely the editor's revision that was supposed to emphasize that slurring was binding throughout the entire Nocturne. EE also introduced similar revisions in bars 16 & 31.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions

b. 2

composition: Op. 27 No 2, Nocturne in D♭ major

..

In GE (→FE) Chopin's dolce was replaced with the abbreviation dol. In EE the full name of the term was restored.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , GE revisions

b. 2

composition: WN 55, Waltz in F minor

 
 
..

The short accent is only in FEF and GEF - it must be Fontana's revision.

category imprint: Differences between sources

b. 2

composition: Op. 24 No. 1, Mazurka in G minor

A dot in  A (→GE)

Absence of any sign in FE (→EE)
..

The absence of a staccato dot in FE (→EE) is probably due to oversight on the part of the engraver.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE

b. 2

composition: Op. 24 No. 3, Mazurka in A♭ major

No mark in AI

 in A (→GE→FE→EE)

Our suggestion
..

A (→GE→FE→EE) has a mark here. In the main text we propose reading it as a long accent for f2, guided first of all by the analogy with bar 26 in A. In AI there is no mark at all.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Long accents