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. 17-25

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

..

In As the bars are not written out with notes. Chopin wrote only empty bars, which undoubtedly means repeating bars 1-9.

category imprint: Source & stylistic information

b. 17-18

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

Two-bar slur in AI

Slur continued in A (→FE→GE,EE)
..

Both the additional slur in bars 16-17 and the visible connection of slurs at the transition between these bars in A clearly prove Chopin's intention with regard to the phrasing in this place. The two-bar slur of AI cannot be considered to be a full-fledged variant in this situation, particularly considering the fact that Chopin did not write slurring in bars 9-16 in this autograph at all.

category imprint: Differences between sources

b. 18

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

Crotchet & a-c1 in As (literal reading)

Crotchet & a-c1 in As (probable interpretation)

Crotchet & a-c1-d1 in AI (literal reading)

Crotchet & a-c1-d1 in AI (probable interpretation)

Crotchet & a-c1 in A (→FE→GE,EE)
..

Same as in bar 2, in the previous manuscripts there is no  raising a to a, which is probably an oversight. Notwithstanding the issue of the , in this bar we have three versions of the accompaniment, out of which the first and third differ only in the rhythmic value of the bass note (which practically most probably means generally a change of the way of its prolongation – implicitly with pedal in As and hand in A). Therefore, we can speak here of Chopin's hesitation, who in AI, written between As and A, wrote a slightly different version.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Chopin's hesitations , Omission of current key accidentals

b. 19

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

g-h in A (probable reading)

d-g-h in As, AI & FE (→GE,EE)

Our variant suggestion
..

On the 2nd crotchet in the L.H. A has – in so far as it may be assumed on the basis of the photography available to us – a g-b third. The remaining sources feature here a d-g-b chord. In the version with the third, the link with the previous bar can be considered to be slightly smoother, however, it is not certain whether it is actually in A. Due to this reason, in the main text we leave the inclusion of the d note at the discretion of the performer.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE

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