mUltimate Chopin

Op. 64 No 2, Waltz in C♯ minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Errors of A

b. 160

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

No  in A

 under rest in FE (→EE,GE1no2→GE2no2)

 after rest in GE1op (→GE2op→GE3op)
..

The absence of the  sign in A is almost certainly a mistake – in analogous bar 32 a respective sign is written. The addition of a  in FE may be attributed to Chopin's proofreading, although the placement of the sign – under the rest and not after it, as in bar 32 – raises certain doubts, as far as the accuracy of reproducing the composer's intention is concerned. In the main text, we stick to the notation of A in bar 32.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors of A , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 161

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

in A (→FE→EE)

No indication in GE

Our variant suggestion
..

The più mosso indication written in A (→FE→EE) suggests that this time the figurative section is to be played faster than the last time (for the first time). This possibility cannot be excluded, yet it seems to be more natural that the section, repeated three times without any changes to the text, is to be played in a generally identical tempo. Since in A the second half of the Waltz (from bar 97) is written in an abbreviated manner, it cannot be excluded that Chopin mechanically repeated in bar 161 the indication from bar 97 (which was necessary there after più lento in bar 65). In this case, the absence of the indication in GE could have been a result of Chopin's proofreading. Therefore, in bar 161 we give più mosso in brackets. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors of A