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. 88

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

 in A (→FE→EEC)

 in GE1op & GE1no2 (→GE2no2)

No sign in EEW1 (→EEW2)

 in GE2op (→GE3op)
..

The  hairpin, in A and in the majority of the editions placed under the three-note progression of the bass, was moved to between the staves in GE2op (→GE3op). In this case, this quite frequently used revision completely changed the meaning of the sign. In the remaining GE, the sign was reproduced in the correct place, however, it starts already under the 1st crotchet in the bar. The absence of the sign in EEW is undoubtedly an oversight.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Placement of markings , Scope of dynamic hairpins , Errors in EE , GE revisions

b. 89-92

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

  in A (→FE→EEC,GE1op,GE1no2→GE2no2)

  in EEW1 (→EEW2)

  in GE2op→GE3op)
..

In the majority of the editions, the range of hairpin in these bars was reproduced exactly after A (→FE). The only exceptions are EEW1 (→EEW2), in which the  begins only in bar 90, and GE2op (→GE3op), in which the entire sign was moved a crotchet earlier; moreover, the next dynamic hairpin, in bars 91-92, was shortened.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , EE inaccuracies

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

b. 98-108

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

Shorter  signs in A

Longer  in FE (→FE,EE)
..

Similarly as in bars 33-44 (in the autographs the discussed bars are their literal repetition), we reproduce the range of the  hairpin after A. All editions, in spite of minor, insignificant differences, include signs of the same, six-quaver length.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins