mUltimate Chopin

Op. 29, Impromptu in A♭ major

Text Compare Notes Sources Description
Page: 
Source: 
p. 5, b. 74-91
p. 1, b. 1-15
p. 2, b. 16-30
p. 3, b. 31-51
p. 4, b. 52-73
p. 5, b. 74-91
p. 6, b. 92-106
p. 7, b. 107-127
Main text
Main text
A - Autograph
FE - French Edition
FE1 - First French edition
FED - Dubois copy
FEJ - Jędrzejewicz copy
FES - Stirling copy
GE - German Edition
GE1 - First German edition
GE2 - Second German edition
GE3 - Second, revised impression of GE2
GE4 - Third impression of GE2
EE - English Edition
EE1 - First English edition
EE2 - Later impression of EE1
Select notes: 
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
Differences
No differences
A - Autograph
FE - French Edition
FE1 - First French edition
FED - Dubois copy
FEJ - Jędrzejewicz copy
FES - Stirling copy
GE - German Edition
GE1 - First German edition
GE2 - Second German edition
GE3 - Second, revised impression of GE2
GE4 - Third impression of GE2
EE - English Edition
EE1 - First English edition
EE2 - Later impression of EE1
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear
Prezentacja
Select 
copy link PDF Main text

  b. 86-87

 

 

The slur in A in bar 86 (at the end of the great stave) clearly suggests a continuation, which is however not proved by the slur in the new line in bar 87. The separated slurs are compatible with the phrasing clearly inscribed in bars 3-6. The constant slur in GE1 is a consequence of unclear notation in A. It can be assumed that the manuscript sent for EE also had a similarly ambiguous notation.

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Overextending slur

notation: Slurs