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

Slurs

b. 48-50

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

..

The endings of the slurs at the beginning of these bars slightly differ from the natural notation of the remaining analogous places:

  • In A the slur ending in bar 49 is written with a flourish; consequently, its ending reaches quite beyond the initial crotchet. The shape of the slur does not indicate an intentional action, and it did not confuse the engraver of GE. It is difficult to certainly say how Fontana recreated it in [FC] – see below. In our transcripts we do not recreate this patent inaccuracy.
  • In FE such an extension to the slur is visible a bar earlier, in bar 48, perhaps due to the confusion of bars, as long as [FC] recreated Chopin's notation in bar 49.
  • In EE the described extension to the slur is to be observed in both these places, which is either a revision or a mistake.

Both in FE and EE the extended slurs occur in the places in which the next slur begins from the 4th quaver in the bar in these editions, hence we consider them together with the variants concerning the placement of the beginnings of the slurs – see bars 45-59.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Source & stylistic information

issues: EE revisions , FE revisions

b. 58

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

Slur from beginning of bar in sources

Slur from 3rd quaver suggested by the editors
..

The comparison with analogous bars – see the note on bar 43 – points to a possible mistake by Chopin, as far as the placement of the slur's beginning is concerned. Due to this, in the main text we suggest a slur whose range corresponds to the slurs' range in the analogous bars. See also the note on bars 57-58.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

b. 63-64

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

Slur in b. 63 in A, literal reading

Slur to b. 64 in GE & FE (→EE)
..

In A the slur ends abruptly at the end of bar 63. In this bar, however, the slur line is dashed due to the running-out pen, hence it is uncertain whether the visible ending of the slur was the one intended by Chopin. In bar 64, at the beginning of a new page, there is no ending to the slur. Nevertheless, both GE and FE (→EE) led the slur to the beginning of this bar, which means that both readers of A – the copyist and the engraver of GE – assumed that the slur in bar 63 suggested that it should be continued. In view of the doubts concerning the reliability of the A notation, in the main text we give its interpretation adopted by the editions.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , Uncertain slur continuation

b. 68-75

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

Slur in b. 68 in A (→GE) & EE2

No slurs in FE (→EE1)

Slur in b. 68-75 suggested by the editors
..

In bars 68-76 the authentic L.H. slurring – in A (→GE) and EE2 – consists of only one slur over the first half-bar figure in bar 68. This is most probably an earlier version, perhaps left by inattention, which is indicated by compatible, complete slurs, entered into A in both subsequent appearances of this phrase, in bars 155-163 and 235-243. As there are no doubts that all three fragments are to be performed analogously, in the main text we suggest slurs modelled after the aforementioned bars. The missing slur in FE (→EE1) could be attributed to an oversight if it were not for the fact that these editions do not include slurs in the following appearances of this phrase either. This means that in the initial version of these places there were no slurs at all, while the A slurs were added after [FC] had been finished. In this case, too, the complete slurring of analogous phrases must be considered an improvement, intentionally referring to the discussed bars as well.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE

b. 71

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

Slur b-c1 in A (→GE) & EE2

No slur in FE (→EE1)
..

The easiest explanation for the missing additional slur in FE (→EE1) is an oversight by the copyist in [FC] or by the engraver of FE. In EE2 the slur was added on the basis of GE1.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE