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

Rhythm

b. 327-331

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

Semibreves in A

Minims in GE (→FE,EE,IE)
..

In bars 327 and 331 the notation of the rhythm of the R.H. part is unclear in A – the top note of the second at the beginning of the bar has no stem. This may mean a semibreve or be just one of the numerous inaccuracies of the notation of A, in which note heads without stems are in chords quite a common occurrence. In the latter case, the notation would mean the second f1-g1 or g1-a1 with the stem down. In the editions, these top notes were given the value of a minim and had stems pointing upwards added to them. However, analysis of the traces of corrections visible in A leads to the conclusion that Chopin had semibreves in mind, as he removed (scratched out) the upward stems of both notes in question, and, moreover, in bar 327 he deleted the note g1 in the 2nd half of the bar and the tie connecting both notes of this pitch, which required the first g1 to be held until the end of bar.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions

b. 336

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

Minim c in A, literal reading

Dotted minim in GE (→FE,EE,IE)

Minim & rest suggested by the editors
..

The GE version (→FE,EE,IE) is a misguided attempt at complementing the R.H. bottom voice. Formally speaking, the notation of this bar is unfinished in A, since the 3rd crotchet in the bottom voice was left incomplete, which, however, is not uncommon in Chopin's notation – cf., e.g. bars 355-357 – and would sometimes lead to misunderstandings and mistakes (cf., e.g. the Variations in B, Op. 2, bars 16-32). In the discussed place, nothing indicates that Chopin would have wanted to prolong the c minim. In order to avoid any doubts, in the main text we add a rest here.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: GE revisions , Inaccuracies in A

b. 362

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

No G1 in sources

Grace note G1 suggested by the editors
..

The missing G1 note at the beginning of the bar seems Chopin's mistake, as it is present in analogous figures in bar 360 and 364. One can ponder whether the unwritten note was supposed to be an element of the octave, as in bar 360, or a grace note, as in bar 364; stylistic arguments are not enough to resolve this doubt. However, the latter seems more likely – in A the gap before the 1st note in bar 362 is clearly bigger than the resulting from the density of notation in this part of the page, which could be indicating an oversight of a planned element, e.g. a grace note.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

b. 383

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

Tie to c2 in A & EE

Slur f2-e2 in GE (→FE,IE)
..

In the main text we provide the A tie, clearly at the pitch of c2. The fact that in GE (→FE,IE) it was assigned to the middle notes of the chords (f2-e2), hence turning it into a slur, was an arbitrary decision by the engraver of GE. Moving the slur to the pitch of c2 in EE, hence restoring it to its initial form, a tie, was also arbitrary – the publisher did not have access to A, yet he interfered with the notation of the slurs/ties between the pairs of the L.H. chords in this place by adding slurs/ties in the next bar, in which Chopin did not write them.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions

b. 386

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

Three parts in A (→GE→FE,EE1,IE)

Two parts in EE2
..

In EE2 the three-part A notation (→GE→FE,EE1,IE) was simplified to the two-part notation. This version, undoubtedly arbitrary, practically – considering the fast tempo, authentic accents and natural pedalling – does not differ from the Chopinesque notation in terms of sound.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions