mUltimate Chopin

Op. 38, Ballade in F major

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : EE revisions

b. 83

composition: Op. 38, Ballade in F major

Literal reading of A (→GC→GE1)

FE (contextual interpretation of A)

EE

GE2 (→GE3)
..

The additional c2 crotchet in EE is probably an editorial revision, aiming at filling the bar in the part of the R.H. The reviser may have not understood that the a crotchet on the bottom stave was to be performed by the R.H. The change is also related to an earlier start of the slur. For a more detailed explanation of the slurring – see the previous note.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions

b. 98-104

composition: Op. 38, Ballade in F major

Slurs in A, contextual interpretation

One slur in FE

One slur in GC(→GE)

Slurs in EE
..

Bar 99 is the last bar on page what caused errors in the notation of slurs in both manuscripts. A lacks the ending of slur in bar 100 although the end of the slur in bar 99 clearly indicates it should continue, and GC (→GE) lacks the slur beginning in bar 98 completely. In EE, the notation of A was recreated quite faithfully by leadng the slur up to the first note in bar 100. The continuous slur in FE is almost certainly the engraver's invention – Chopin did not proofread FE1. However, it seems possible that Chopin accepted the mergence of slurs both here, and in the subsequent bars. In the main text we keep the separate slurs of A, complementing the first with the omitted fragment at the beginning of bar 100.

 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccurate slurs in A , FE revisions , Inaccuracies in GC

b. 108-111

composition: Op. 38, Ballade in F major

SLurs in A (→GC,FE)

Supplement suggested by the editors

Slurs in GE

Slurs in EE
..

In A, the L.H. slurring seems to be incomplete, since the motifs in bar 109 are provided with slurs, whereas the analogous motifs in the adjacent bars are not. Due to this reason, in the main text we suggest adding two respective slurs. GC and FE generally repeat the slurs of A; however, both sources reproduced the first slur in bar 109 inaccurately: in FE it begins (on a new line) as if it continued the slur from the previous bar, in which there is however no slur, whereas in GC the slur reaches up to g in the middle of the bar. Since these minor inaccuracies actually do not influence the performance, we consider them to be accidental, insignificant defects.

The authentic slurs were arbitrarily prolonged both in GE and EE, differently in each source. 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions , GE revisions

b. 110-111

composition: Op. 38, Ballade in F major

No slur in A (→GC,FE)

Slur in EE

Slur in GE
..

The L.H. slurs added in EE & GE are certainly inauthentic.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , GE revisions

b. 112

composition: Op. 38, Ballade in F major

Slur from 2nd octave in A (→FE,EE)

Slur from first octave in GC (→GE)
..

It is not obvious which version of the slur corresponds to Chopin's intention. The earlier beginning of slur In GC (→GE) results from copyist's negligence, but it is precisely such slur that seems more appropriate when the B1-B octave at the beginning of bar is repeated, as in the main text – cf. whole-bar slurs in the following bars. While removing the ties sustaining the B1-B octave, Chopin could have paid no heed to the slur. Therefore, in the main text we give a slur encompassing the entire bar.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , FE revisions