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. 95-100

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

4 slurs twice in A (→GE)

2 continuous slurs in FE (→EE)
..

As far as the L.H. slurs in bars 95-96 and 99-100 are concerned, the two groups of sources show similar differences to those observed in bars 93-94. In this case, it is also difficult to conclusively determine the origin thereof; however, it seems likely that Chopin was adding slurs to A and to [FC] or FE1 twice, at a different time. In the main text we give the slurs of the principal source, that is A. They are very characteristic due to their motivic, and not pianistic nature – respective slurs encompass six-quaver groups that do not correspond to subsequent L.H. positions, but are composed of pairs of different chords. It is only the second time (bars 262-263 and 266-267) that the slurs are compliant with the hand position and combine groups generally based on one chord.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

b. 98-99

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

Slur to a1-a2 in A, literal reading

Slur to g1-e2-g2 in GE & FE (→EE)
..

As in bars 93-94, the A slur encompasses the phrase in bars 97-98 and, interpreted literally, ends on the a1-a2 octave. In this case, however, we consider the interpretation adopted by GE and FE (→EE) to be accurate, and in the main text we lead the slur to the 1st crotchet in bar 99, which ends the phrase.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A

b. 98

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

Extra slur in sources

No extra slur, our suggestion
..

In the main text we omit the additional 'triplet' slur – cf. General Editorial Principles, p. 16.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

issues: Triplet slurs

b. 100-101

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

Slur in b. 100 in A & FE (contextual interpretation→EE)

Slur to b. 101 in GE
..

The ending of the last A slur reaches the bar line at the end of a page, which could suggest that it should be continued, and this is how it was interpreted in GE, despite the fact that in bar 101 (on a new page) there is no continuation of this slur. According to us, it is not conveyed by the A notation, not to mention the musical sense, hence in the main text we lead the slur to the last quaver in bar 100. The FE notation is also ambiguous, due to the same reason as in A – the slur in bar 100, at the end of a line, suggests that it should be continued, but there is no continuation in bar 101. The interpretation of EE coincides with our assessment.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , Inaccurate slurs in A , Uncertain slur continuation

b. 109-110

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

..

The range of the slur is unclear in A – at the end of bar 109, which ends a line, the slur fades due to lack of ink, while bar 110 does not contain a continuation thereof. Therefore, when interpreted literally, it reaches the last quaver in bar 109. Nevertheless, there is no doubt that Chopin meant a longer slur, as in the next three analogous figures. This is how it was reproduced in all editions.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , GE revisions , FE revisions , Uncertain slur continuation