Select: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Rhythm
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main


Rhythm

b. 142

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

Crotchet f1 in A

No note in GE (→FE,EE,IE)

..

The omission of the f1 crotchet at the end of the bar could be related to its position. In A this note is on the top stave (the other L.H.-part notes are on the bottom one), between the last notes in the R.H. part, which could have confused the engraver.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE

b. 160

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

Crotchet e1 in A & IE

Dotted crotchet e1 in GE (→FE,EE)

..

The addition of an augmentation dot to e1 is a wrong revision, based on the assumption that the bottom voice, represented by the e1 crotchet and the c1 quaver, should be complemented so that it is a minim. According to us, it is already complemented by the f1 quaver on which both bottom voices meet. An approximate record of voices performed by one hand is typical of the Chopinesque notation. In this case, it seems that it was the overly precise notation on the last quaver that caused the misunderstanding – had Chopin written the 2nd half of the bar as follows: , the mistake probably would not have happened.
The omission of this dot in IE, unless it is an oversight, proves that the engraver/reviser of this edition had a better understanding of voice leading. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions ,

b. 172-175

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

Arrangement of voices in A

Arrangement of voices in GE (→FE,EE,IE)

..

In the main text we provide the L.H. part as written by Chopin in A. GE (→FE,EE,IE) arbitrarily changed the layout of the quaver beams and flags to make it symmetrical with the R.H. part. According to us, the notation used in the editions, although inauthentic, seems to be better suited for the representation of the organisation of voices in this place, in particular emphasising the sequence in the bass as a separate voice is more natural than emphasising the tenor voice.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions

b. 179-180

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

4 slurs in A

No slurs in GE (→FE,EE,IE)

..

The absence of all slurs between the chords in GE (→FE,EE,IE) is most probably due to inattention of the engraver of GE1.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE

b. 188-189

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

No tie (slur?) in sources

Tie (slur?) suggested by the editors

..

The analogous L.H. sequences in bars 187-188 and 188-189 are most probably supposed to be performed identically. Due to this reason, in the main text we suggest adding a slur (or a tie?) to c1, as marked by Chopin in bars 5-6.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

issues: Errors of A