mUltimate Chopin

WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Inaccuracies in PE

b. 10-11

composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major

JC, literal reading

JC, interpretation

EF

PE, interpretation
..

In the main text we give the undoubtedly later version of the accompaniment written – with minor inaccuracies – in PE. The new shape of the accompaniment in this version was provided with slurs and the indication legato, probably by Chopin. The text of EF is a more precise notation of the earlier version, written in a partially draft form also in JC. In that last manuscript, it is three additional notes that draw attention; their meaning and relation to the remaining part of the notation is ambiguous. It could be, e.g., a draft of a new version of the bass line in this bar developed by Chopin.  

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Source & stylistic information

issues: Accompaniment changes , Inaccuracies in PE

b. 13-14

composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major

No marks in JC & EF

Accents in PE
..

In the main text we give the accents after PE. Although the sign in bar 13 is unclear, the musical context and partial similarity with the unequivocal accent in bar 14 allow to consider it as a misprinted vertical accent.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Vertical accents , Inaccuracies in PE

b. 14

composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major

No slur in JC

Slur in EF

Slur in PE

Our suggestion
..

In PE, due to small gaps between the notes, the moment when the slur begins is unclear. In the main text we adopt the slur from the beginning of the bar, as in analogous bar 13. This is also how it was printed in EF, yet in this case the end of the slur is drawn until the g3-b3 third. The latter generally makes no difference. 

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in PE

b. 15

composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major

No lower voice in JC

Two voices in EF

Two voices in PE
..

Lack of the lower voice in JC is certainly the copyist's oversight. The way of subscribing the last notes in PE suggests a simultaneous strike of the e1-c2 sixth, which could correspond to Chopin's intention, as such an edition would faithfully render the notation of [A]. For such a rhythm of the lower voice could have been easily written as , we consider the notation of PE as inaccurate and we subscribe the notes according to their rhythmic values.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors of JC , Inaccuracies in PE

b. 19

composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major

..

In JC there is no  lowering a3 into a3, which is a patent error; in the copy there is also no relevant sign before a2. PE is also missing a flat before the latter, which can correspond to the notation of [A], as Chopin often extended the validity of cautionary accidentals onto entire passages or scales of this kind.

The same applies to bar 46, marked in the sources as a repetition of bar 19. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Accidentals in different octaves , Omission of current key accidentals , Errors of JC , Inaccuracies in PE