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. 75-76

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

New slur from 3rd beat of bar 75 in AI, contextual interpretation

Continuous slur in A (→FE→EE,GE1op,GE1no2→GE2no2)

New slur from 3rd beat of bar 76 in GE2op (→GE3op)
..

In AI, the slur running from bar 73 ends over the 1st crotchet in bar 75, whereas a new slur begins from the 3rd beat of this bar. Leaving the 2nd crotchet outside of the phrases raises doubts – according to the musical sense, it is the first slur that is most probably too short, e.g. as a result of ink stoppage. Therefore, we interpret it as reaching e2.
The broken slur in bar 76 is an arbitrary revision of GE2op (→GE3op). 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , GE revisions

b. 76-77

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

d3 repeated in As, AI & A (→FE→EE)

d3 tied in GE & FED
..

Same as in bars 66-67 and 70-71, both source versions of the melody at the transition between the bars are almost certainly authentic. In the main text, we give a version with a repeated d3, written in the basic source, A (→FE→EE). Similarly in bars 92-93.
GE1no2 erroneously puts the tie between the two notes in bar 76 (a "mirror" mistake).

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FED , Errors in GE , GE revisions , Sign reversal , Authentic corrections of GE

b. 76-77

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

 in A

 in FE (→EEW1→EEW2)

No sign in GE & EEC
..

The range of the  hairpin in A is not entirely clear – the mark's arms are of different length and it goes beyond the bar line ending bar 76 and the line of the text. The mark in FE could have been added in the last proofreading, together with the correction of the part of the L.H. – it is indicated by the fact that it was completely omitted in GE. The absence of the mark in EEC is probably due to an oversight. In the main text, we assume a possibly literal interpretation of the sign on the basis of A.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Errors in EE , Errors in GE

b. 77-78

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

Fingering written into FES

No teaching fingering
..

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FES

b. 77-80

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

As

AI

A (→FE→GE,EE)
..

The version of As undoubtedly gives way to both later ones, which, actually, differ only in two elements – the rhythm of the melody in bar 77 and the number of touches in the part of the L.H. in bar 79. The same as in bar 71, the change of rhythm in bar 77 could have been introduced in A as a correction of the earlier rhythm of the crotchets.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Accompaniment changes , Main-line changes