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. 92-93

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

Slurs written in FES

No slurs in remaining sources

Our variant suggestion
..

Two slurs, written in pencil, probably by Chopin, indicate natural positions of the hand. The slurs only make sense with the final version of the L.H. part – see neighbouring note.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FES

b. 92-93

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

As

AI

A (→FE→GE,EE)
..

The visible evolution of the accompanying part generally consisted in an each time earlier introduction of the diminished seventh chord – in As on the last beat of bar 93, in AI – a crotchet earlier, in the version intended for print – already in bar 92. In both earlier autographs, the bars are an exact repetition of bars 76-77 (also in the melodic line); in turn, in the final version, Chopin clearly differentiated between the mood of the phrase's climax – for the first time, the diminished chord naturally introduces a D major cadence; for the second time, the harmonic course is dramatically suspended on this chord, whereas the descending phrase in the R.H. carefully avoids any associations with the D major key.
In FE, there is no  raising g1 to g1 in bar 93, which became necessary after a 5th flat in the key signature was added – cf. bars 64-96. The inadvertence was corrected in EE. The sign was added – unnecessarily – also in GE2no2.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions , Accompaniment changes

b. 93-96

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

As, first version

As, 2nd version

As, 3rd version & AI, contextual interpretation

As, 4th version

A (→FE→GE,EE)
..

Four versions of these bars written in As illustrate the evolution of the concept of the ending of this section. The catalyst for change was, as it seems, the harmonic course – from a simple replacement of the final tonic chord with its minor version in the first edition, through a three-bar modulation with the use of a characteristic leading chord (it can be interpreted as, e.g. an altered f-a-c-e subdominant) in the second one, to the suspension of the harmonic course on the diminished seventh chord in the last two (see also the note on bars 92-93).

As far as the melodic line is concerned, the major transformation took place in the last two bars. Chopin started from repeating the phrase from bars 77-80, with a change only in the last bar, having a nature of a connecting episode with the beginning of the refrain. In the next versions, the changes appear each time earlier; one can also see that two elements, which then contributed to the final version – leading the phrase to g1, and not g2, and the descending diminished seventh f2-g1 (written initially as e2-g1) – were already in the second version, yet Chopin then transitionally resigned from the seventh. It is also worth noting that both versions of the melody used in the finished editions of the piece (AI and the published version) are already included in As. 

Due to the lack of indication of the conclusive version, we assume the earliest version to be the text of As.
In the second of the given variants, we take into account two slurs in the L.H., which, due to major differences between particular editions of the accompanying part, are to be applied only in this version. 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Chopin's hesitations , Accompaniment changes , Main-line changes

b. 93

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

Staccato dot in A (→FE→GE1no2,EEC)

No mark in GE1op (→GE2op→GE3op), EEW1 (→EEW2) & GE2no2
..

The majority of the editions omit a staccato dot written in A (→FE→GE1no2,EEC) above the last L.H. chord. The sign only make sense with the final version of the L.H. part – see note to bars 92-93.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in EE , Errors in GE , GE revisions

b. 97

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

No sign in A (→FE→EE,GE1op,GE1no2)

 in GE2op (→GE3op) & GE2no2
..

The absence of the  sign in A could be considered an inaccuracy related to the transition to the abbreviated notation from the next bar. In this kind of situations, the notation in the bar that initiates a non-written out section is often of a partially draft nature – cf., e.g., the Polonaise in E minor, Op. 26 No. 2, bar 105. Paradoxically, the more exactly Chopin wrote such a bar, the higher a chance of a misunderstanding, since the engravers would consider the notation to be complete – cf., e.g., the Polonaise in E minor, Op. 26 No. 2, bar 49. However, in this case it is not certain, since the indications in this bar actually seem to be complete – tempo, slur, pedalling. What is more, in the next empty bar, Chopin wrote a hairpin, as if he wanted to emphasise that it is to be considered only from bar 98. In this situation, in the main text we leave the notation of A without any changes, whereas the sign added in later GE may be considered an acceptable addition. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions