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
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

Articulation, Accents, Hairpins

b. 302-304

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

Short accents in A (→GE) & EE2

No marks in FE (→EE1)

Long accents suggested by the editors
..

According to us, the short accents in bar 302 and 304 resulted from the inaccuracy of the A notation (→GE), hence in the main text we suggest long accents, as in the preceding phrase. In EE2 the accents were added on the basis of GE1.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Long accents , EE revisions

b. 302-309

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

cresc. - - - to b, 309 in A

cresc. - - to end of b. 309 in GE

in b. 309 in FE (→EE1)

cresc. - - &  in EE2

cresc. - - & , our alternative suggestion
..

Chopin added the multi-bar cresc. - - indication – along with a number of other indications in this fragment – to A after [FC] had been finished, which explains its absence in FE (→EE1). In the very FE (or earlier in [FC]) there is only the  hairpin in bar 309, which, being almost certainly authentic, can be considered an alternative concept of leading the course to the culminant chord in bar 310.
In the A notation it is noteworthy that the dashes markings the range of crescendo do not reach the end of bar 309, and therefore  and  in bar 310. GE considered it an insignificant inaccuracy and extended the dashes to the end of the bar. We provide this natural interpretation of the A notation in the main text. However, it is also likely that Chopin hesitated while writing the dashes, perhaps considering using a different indication in the last bar, e.g. a , as in FE, and then started doing something else without making the decision. We include this possibility as an alternative solution. 

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

issues: EE revisions , Corrections in A , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE , Inaccuracies in A

b. 310

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

Wedge & staccato dot in A

2 dots in GE

No marks in FE (→EE)
..

The staccato marks for the right and the left hands were probably added by Chopin to A later (after [FC] had been finished), like many other indications in this fragment. In GE the wedge over the R.H. chord was considered a carelessly written dot, which is very frequent in the B & H editions.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Wedges

b. 311-315

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

Different L.H. accents &  in A

L.H. short accents &  in GE

Different R.H. accents & L.H.  in FE

Different R.H. accents & L.H.  in EE
..

In bar 311, 313 and 315 the A accents clearly differ in terms of their length and – despite certain inaccuracies – certainly concern the L.H. At the same time, the mark in the 2nd half of bar 311 reaches the quaver, hence, when interpreted literally, it looks like a  hairpin. It confused the engravers, who also reproduced the analogous marks in bar 313 and 315 in the same way. It is worth noting that the versions of A and FE are highly compliant, hence the difference in the position of the accents (short) at the beginning of these bars is particularly striking – contrary to the unambiguous A notation, they were assigned to the R.H., which suggests that [FC] was inaccurate in this respect. In EE it was also the second mark in bar 315 that was assigned to the R.H.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions

b. 312

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

Short accents in A & EE2

Long accents in GE

Short accent in b. 314 in FE (→EE1)
..

The accent in bar 312 could have been added to A after [FC] had been finished, which is indicated by it having been placed differently than the accent in bar 314 (under and not over the octave). The type of accents can give rise to doubts, since they are slightly longer than those at the beginning of bar 311, 313 and 315. The musical context suggests that all five marks should be considered equally (they concern crotchets separated by rests), which is confirmed by the unquestionable long accents in the middle of bar 313 and 315, clearly longer than all the remaining ones. In GE the two discussed accents were reproduced as long, while in FE (→EE1) the only mark in this edition in bar 314 – as short. In EE2 both accents are short – the former on the basis of FE2, while the latter – inaccurately repeated after GE1.
Despite their differing position, once under and once over the octave, both marks in A clearly concern the L.H., hence, for the sake of clarity, we place both under the octaves. In GE both accents were placed over the octaves; moreover, it was performed in an ambiguous manner, as far as their assignment to one of the hands is concerned.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Placement of markings , GE revisions