mUltimate Chopin

WN 29, Waltz in E minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Inaccuracies in PE

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. 125-127

composition: WN 29, Waltz in E minor

L.H. accents in PE, contextual interpretation

R.H. accents in GE
..

Assigning the accents to the R.H. part must be a mistake by the engraver of GE. Although the version of PE is not clear from the graphical point of view, the natural addressee of these accents are the distinct L.H. minims resulting from syncopation.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in PE

b. 143

composition: WN 29, Waltz in E minor

Notation in PE1 (→PE2) & PE4

Notation in PE3

Notation in GE
..

The notation of PE1 (→PE2), which is devoid of the 1st beat of the bar on the top stave, although formally inaccurate, could be authentic, since Chopin would often omit rests specifying the voice scheme or filling the bar in quasi-polyphonic notation (e.g. in the R.H. in bars 117-119). Therefore, in the main text we leave it unchanged, since it seems unlikely that it could mislead the performers. In GE the bar on the top stave was completed by replacing 2 crotchet rests with a semibreve rest. An interesting yet rather unfortunate attempt at correcting the initial version of notation was made in PE3 by adding an additional stem to the bottom note of the octave, E1. This addition was removed in PE4, thus restoring the version of PE1.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Inaccuracies in PE , Revisions in #PE