mUltimate Chopin

Op. 64 No 2, Waltz in C♯ minor

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

b. 31-32

composition: Op. 64 No 2, Waltz in C♯ minor

..

In analogy to bars 159–160 in some of later collective editions an analogous version was introduced also here. Examples of minor diversifications, introduced at repetitions of similar phrases, are too numerous in Chopin's music in order to consider such a unification to be justified. Cf., e.g., the Mazurka in G minor, Op. 24 No. 1, bar 57.

category imprint: Source & stylistic information

b. 31

composition: Op. 64 No 2, Waltz in C♯ minor

 before 3rd beat in A

 after 3rd beat in FE (→EEC,GE1no2,GE1op→GE2op→GE3op)

 on 3rd beat in EEW1 (→EEW2) & GE2no2
..

Same as in bar 29, the  sign, misplaced in FE under the last quaver, was moved in EEW1 (→EEW2) and GE2no2 under the 3rd beat of the bar.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions

b. 31-32

composition: Op. 64 No 2, Waltz in C♯ minor

 in A

No sign in FE (→EE,GE1op,GE1no2)

 in GE2op (→GE3op) & GE2no2

Our variant suggestion
..

It is uncertain whether Chopin considered the  sign written in A to be valid or not. The hairpin is absent in FE, yet it does not seem that it was deleted – it is rather an oversight of the engraver. On the other hand, in analogous bars 159-160 both A and the editions include a contrary sign, , so that one can ponder whether Chopin could have committed a mistake by writing here . Taking into account the above observations, in the main text we leave the inclusion of  at the discretion of the performer.

The  sign in later GE was certainly added on the basis of comparison with the reprise.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE

b. 31

composition: Op. 64 No 2, Waltz in C♯ minor

in As

in AI

in A (→FE→GE,EE)
..

Three versions of this bar show that Chopin from the very beginning had a general vision of shaping the melodic line –  – and that he tried to fill the framework with different motivic cells, as, e.g., the f-g progression or a pair of repeated notes. The latter appears only in AI and A, probably in relation to eliminating it from the melody in previous bar 30. 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

b. 32

composition: Op. 64 No 2, Waltz in C♯ minor

c in As, AI, A & GE

C in FE (→EE)
..

The change of c to C is certainly a result of Chopin intervention in the last phase of proofreading of FE (→EE). Similarly in bar 160.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Accompaniment changes , Authentic corrections of FE , Bass register changes