In A Chopin marked detailed dynamic changes in each bar. The emerging from them precise shape of detailed phrasing is so consistent and suggestive that it is hard to believe that Chopin would expose the editor to the risk of deleting such a number of correctly engraved signs. Probably all of them were omitted as a result of the engraver's haste or inaccuracy; what is more, lack of the hairpins in bars 5, 8 and 9 in GE may imply that these signs were also originally absent in FE and that Chopin added them in the last proofreading. However, if even one sign visible in FE was added by Chopin at the time of proofreading, it would mean that the composer proofread the dynamic marks in this fragment in this edition and considered them satisfactory. The musical image transferred by FE, although less detailed, seems to be quite convincing:
- the first marked dynamic changes appear in bars 3-4, which distinguishes these two bars and combines the first four-bar section;
- in the second four-bar section, beginning in a progression a second higher than the first one, the pair of dynamic marks suggests a slightly more distinctive stress on details, underlining the dissonances related to the minor mode;
- from this moment, similar delicate dynamic waving accompanies already both following appearances of this phrase (bars 9 and 13).
This is the reason why we consider both main, source sets of signs – A and FE – to be equal; as they seem to be largely complementary, we suggest them in the main text in the variant form.
Also the cresc. indications in bars 7 and 15, omitted in the editions, can be, according to us, considered as optative hints, whereby the second 
mark in bar 8 only strengthens the articulation of the motifs indicated with slurs. See also bars 17-25.
category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations
issues: Inaccuracies in FE
notation: Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Back to note