mUltimate Chopin

(Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt IV

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. 79-80

composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt IV

Slur to d4 in A

Slur to e4 in GE (→FE,EE,IE)
..

The shorter GE slur (→FE,EE,IE) is probably a mistake, since there is no reason to intentionally change the slur in the discussed place after the three correctly reproduced slurs in the preceding bars.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE

b. 80-83

composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt IV

..

In A there is no  to the middle note of the arpeggiated L.H. chord (a1) and not a single  to the a notes (in different octaves) in the next 3 bars. Chopin also omitted the naturals raising e2 to e2 in the 2nd half of bar 81 and e1 to e1 in the 2nd half of bar 82. In GE (→FE,EE,IE) all necessary accidentals were added, considering the validity of accidentals irrespective of the presence of an octave sign (the 2nd half of bar 81 was left without accidentals).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions

b. 82-83

composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt IV

Arpeggio sign in b. 83 in A

No signs in GE (→FE,EE,IE)

Arpeggio signs in both bars suggested by the editors
..

In bar 82, the missing arpeggio in A is almost certainly due to Chopin's oversight – a side effect of the corrections (erasures) visible there. The absence of the mark in bar 83 in GE (→FE,EE,IE) can be explained similarly – inadvertence of the engraver of GE1.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Errors resulting from corrections , Errors in GE , Errors of A

b. 82-83

composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt IV

Slurs & wedge in A

No markings in GE (→FE,EE,IE)
..

The omitted R.H. articulation markings in GE (→FE,EE,IE) could have resulted from the uncertainty to the range of the slurs and to the presence and kind of the staccato marks. In A in many places Chopin would shorten slurs whenever it was impossible to enter them conveniently (cf. I mov., bars 17-20), hence the engraver could have hesitated between a slur encompassing 3 or 2 notes. The lonely (in spite of a few similar figures) staccato mark could have also been questionable. In the main text we provide the literal interpretation of these marks. 

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , Errors in GE , Wedges

b. 85-89

composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt IV

B in L.H. & R.H. in A

B in L.H. only in GE (→FE,EE,IE)
..

In the main text we keep the notation of the last chord in bar 85 and 89 used in A, in which the B note belongs – at least according to the notation – to the parts of both hands. The simplified notation introduced by GE (→FE,EE,IE) corresponds to the actual performance, but it obliterates the sequence of the R.H. bottom voice, which Chopin apparently wanted to show precisely.
Similarly, in bar 97 and 101.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions