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
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

Articulation, Accents, Hairpins

b. 13

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

 in A (probable interpretation) & GE2no2

 in A, possible interpretation

 in FE (→EEC,GE1no2,GE1op→GE2op→GE3op)

in EEW
..

The range of the  hairpin written in A is unclear – the top arm seems to be much longer than the bottom one. The respective sign in FE (→EEC, the majority of GE) perhaps corresponds to the range of the bottom arm of the hairpin of A. In the main text, we suggest an averaged range of the sign, which then leads to the topmost note of the melody; a similar length of the sign is also – as a result of revision – in GE2no2. Alternatively, one can take into account the top arm, written probably first – such a longer hairpin determines the peak of crescendo practically at the beginning of the next bar. The lack of continuation of the sign in bar 13 in EEW results almost certainly from the division into great staves – in this edition bar 13 opens a new line.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions , EE inaccuracies , Inaccuracies in A

b. 17-18

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

 in A (→FE→EE,GE1no2,GE1op→GE2op→GE3op)

Shorter  in GE2no2
..

The  hairpin in A is slightly longer than in bars 1-2 and 3-4, which was reproduced in all editions except for GE2no2. In the latter, the signs are clearly shorter in all analogous bars.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions

b. 19-24

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

2 different length  in A

2 longer  in FE (→GE,EE)

4 shorter  suggested by the editors
..

The absence of the  signs in bars 19-20 is to be considered to be rather an inaccuracy of notation – admittedly, Chopin would sometimes omit indications (e.g. pedalling) in fragments that had already appeared with indications, yet the presence of the hairpin in bars 23-24 points to an oversight of the composer. The conclusion is confirmed by the signs added in the proofreading of FE in bars 147-148, based on the same notation of A. The range of the signs in bars 23-24 can also raise certain doubts – particularly the sign in bar 24 is clearly longer than the previous. According to us, it is more likely that Chopin wrote the signs more diligently for the 1st time – see bars 3-8. We also consider that the slightly shorter signs leave more possibilities of interpretation of this motif, whose performance – according to relations of one of the pupils, Wilhelm von Lenz – posed quite a performance challenge: "It was difficult to please Chopin in this Waltz. Only he was able to [correctly] combine the only (!) semiquaver in the third bar with the following crotchet." 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins

b. 21-22

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

 in A, EEw1 (→EEW2) & GE2op (→GE3op)

 in FE (→GE1op,GE1no2)

 in EEC & GE2no2
..

The  hairpin was inaccurately reproduced in the editions – already in FE (→GE1op,GE1no2) the sign is clearly shorter, which in the remaining editions was subject to further distortions or revisions. The compatibility of the sign's range in A and GE2op (→GE3op) and EEW is a result of overlapping of arbitrary, yet contrary changes.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions , EE inaccuracies

b. 25

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

No sign in the sources

 suggested by the editors
..

In the main text we suggest adding a  sign in this bar due to analogy with bar 9, yet above all due to the hairpin written in A in closely analogous bar 153.

category imprint: Editorial revisions