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. 116

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

2 long accents in A (→GE)

in FE (→EE)
..

As in bars 110-114, the longer  mark in FE may be authentic, added by Chopin to [FC] or at the stage of proofreading FE1. According to us, it is, however, unlikely that Chopin would have replaced the two accents visible in A with it, since the latter was probably added as part of corrections and additions after [FC] had been finished. This is indicated by the fact that the second accent is absent in FE in each of the two subsequent bars, which most probably means that Chopin added them to A later. Therefore, in the main text we give the A (→GE) version, probably resulting from Chopin's correction; a correction going beyond the one that found its way to FE at the composer's initiative.  

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents

b. 117-118

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

4 long accents in A (→GE)

2 long accents in FE

2 short accents in EE
..

The second accent in each of these bars visible in A (→GE) was probably added by Chopin to A after [FC] had been finished. The shorter accents in EE are an inaccuracy resulting from the fact that the EE editors were unaware of the existence of long accents as a separate category of accents.

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , EE inaccuracies

b. 120-123

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

of different size in A, probable reading

in b. 120 & 122 in GE

No signs in FE (→EE1)

in b. 120 in EE2

 to b. 121 & 123 in A, contextual interpretation
..

As in bar 109 and analog., the  hairpins in bars 120-121 and 122-123 were almost certainly added to A as part of corrections and additions after [FC] had been finished, which explains their absence in FE (→EE1). However, their range in A is questionable – it is uncertain whether they end before or after the bar line. We provide marks of varied length as the A version, whereas in the main text we lead both marks to the next bar, in accordance with the unanimous A version in analogous bars 287-290. In EE2 the mark in bar 120 was added after comparing it with GE1.

Learn more »

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

issues: EE revisions , Scope of dynamic hairpins , Corrections in A

b. 123-126

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

Long accents in A (→GE)

Short accents in FE (→EE)
..

The short accents of FE most probably resulted from A having been inaccurately reproduced, which could have been attributed to both Fontana in [FC] and the engraver of FE – cf., e.g. the versions of the autograph and Fontana's copy and the end result in FE in the Prelude in G minor, Op. 28 No. 12, bars 37-38.

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in FE

b. 126

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

Long accent in A (→GE)

No mark in FE (→EE1)

Short accent in EE2
..

The easiest explanation for the absence of the last accent in the sequence of chords in FE (→EE1) would be an oversight. In EE2 the mark was most probably added after comparing it with GE1; however, the shape of the mark was adjusted to the preceding short accents.

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Errors in FE