mUltimate Chopin

Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

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. 320

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

Adagio & sostenuto in A (→GE)

Adagio sostenuto in FE (→EE)
..

In A the sostenuto indication is written below Adagio and in slightly smaller font. Therefore, it seems that the engraver of GE was right when he decided not to combine the terms in one indication. On the other hand, the correction visible in A – instead of Adagio Chopin initially wrote Lento – shows that the final version of the indication was being developed gradually and that both its parts could have been written at a different time, which would explain the observed inconsistency in notation. Therefore, the FE version (→EE), which could have been added in this form by Chopin to [FC] or even while proofreading FE, can be considered an equal variant. We leave it to the discretion of the performers to decide what impact, if any, it has in practice. 

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Corrections in A , Deletions in A

b. 321

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

cresc. - - & smorz. - - in A

No indications in FE (→EE1)

cresc. & smorz. - in GE

cresc. & smorz. in EE2
..

In the main text we provide the indications added by Chopin to A after [FC] had been finished. They were repeated in GE, and on the basis thereof in EE2, yet in both cases it was performed inaccurately. None of these versions can be authentic.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE

b. 321

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

No sign in A (→GE)

Arpeggio sign in FE (→EE)

Our variant suggestion
..

The arpeggio was probably added by Chopin to [FC] or while proofreading FE (→EE). In the main text we include it in a variant form. See also bar 322.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions; Corrections & alterations

issues: Authentic corrections of FE

b. 321-322

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

Slur from crotchet to crotchet in A

Slur from minim to quaver in GE1

Slur from minim to crotchet in GE2

No slur in FE (→EE)
..

In FE (→EE) the missing slur over the separated R.H. voice resulted either from a mistake or from a misunderstanding of the overlapping A slurs (see the next note). The earlier beginning of the slur is probably a revision, while the earlier ending in GE1 – an inaccuracy, corrected in GE2.

category imprint: Differences between sources

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

b. 321

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

in A

in GE & FE (→EE)
..

The range of the  mark in A may give rise to doubts, since its arms are of different length. The engravers took into account the bottom, longer arm and assumed that the mark reaches the last small crotchet. It does not seem to be an accurate interpretation of Chopin's intention, since such long crescendo cannot be simultaneously combined with smorz. - -. The editors of mUltimate Chopin assume the top arm of the mark to be reliable, written first, and this is how they reproduce this hairpin both in the transcription of A and in the main text.
(Minor inaccuracies in the reproduction of the A hairpins by the editions are also to be seen in the case of the previous marks in this bar.)

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , Inaccuracies in A