mUltimate Chopin

Op. 64 No 2, Waltz in C♯ minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Chopin's hesitations

b. 8-24

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

c1 ×3 in As, 1st version, probable reading

d1 ×3 in As, 2nd version, contextual interpretation

d1-d1-c1 in As, 1st version, possible reading,
or
d1-d1-c1 in AI

d1-c1-c1 in A (→FE→GE,EE)
..

In bar 8 the version of the R.H. adopted by us as the text of As (written in the main course of the text's line of As) is partially hypothetical, since the 1st quaver is blurred, whereas in the second the bottom note is unclear. One can consider the version of AI (excluding the rhythm) to be an alternative interpretation of this notation. The second of the given versions of As is written over the R.H. and under the L.H. of the first, probably with an intention to choose one of them later. In the version prepared for print, Chopin opted for an intermediate version in the R.H., in which d1 appears only in the 1st quaver, while in the L.H. he returned to the original version. The absence of  before d1 in the alternative version of As is a patent inaccuracy – the sign is in the previous bar.

In bar 24 all sources feature the same versions as in bar 8.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Chopin's hesitations

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. 27-28

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

c2 repeated in As & A (→FE→EE,GE1no2,GE1op→GE2op→GE3op)

c2 tied in AI, FED & GE2no2
..

The sources illustrate here Chopin's hesitation – c2 is repeated in As and A (→FE→EE,GE; except for GE2no2), yet it is sustained in AI and FED. In the main text, we give the version of the base source, i.e. A, particularly considering the fact that in the autograph Chopin most probably deleted the tie sustaining this note. Cf. also bars 29-30.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FED , Corrections in A , Chopin's hesitations

b. 40-56

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

No accidental in As & A (→FE→EEC) – f2

 in AI – f2

 in GE & EEW1 (→EEW2) – f2
..

On the last quaver of bars 40 and 56, both f2 in As and f2 in AI are written in a way that does not raise any doubts. It proves that while working on the Waltz, Chopin certainly considered two versions of this note. In this situation, leaving it in A (→FE) without an accidental does not allow interpreting Chopin's intention with an absolute certainty. In the main text, we assume an interpretation compatible with the valid norm, however, we specify the sound with a cautionary .

The version of EEC is certainly erroneous.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions; Corrections & alterations

issues: Accidentals in different octaves , Chopin's hesitations , Main-line changes

b. 65-96

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

..

In A (→GE), the entire section is written in a four-flat key signature. In the proofreading of FE (→EE), Chopin changed the notation to the one compliant with D major, prevailing in this section. AI also includes the correct notation with five flats. The notation of As, in which there is no key signature for this section, does not allow us to clearly answer the question whether Chopin considered flats before g notes to be necessary or not – he wrote them in bars 68-70 and 79-80 and omitted in bars 71-76. Considerable evidence of uncertainty surrounding the number of signs in the key signature can be found in the notation of, e.g. the Mazurkas in G minor, op. 33 no. 1 or in C minor, op. 63 no. 3, and less tangible – also in many other situations in various compositions.

Since the difference does not have any impact on the sound of music, and the notation with five flats, more convenient for the reader, was eventually introduced by Chopin, we adopt it as the only one and we do not record differences in notation resulting from the distinct number of flats in the key signature. The original notation of A and GE is conveyed by their versions "transcription".  

category imprint: Differences between sources; Source & stylistic information

issues: Chopin's hesitations , Errors of A , Authentic corrections of FE , Last key signature sign