Page: 
Source: 
p. 1, b. 1-24
p. 1, b. 1-24
p. 2, b. 25-48
p. 3, b. 49-72
p. 4, b. 73-92
p. 5, b. 93-120
p. 6, b. 121-140
p. 7, b. 141-160
p. 8, b. 161-192
p. 9, b. 193-214
p. 10, b. 215-241
Main text
Main text
GC - Gutmann's Copy
FE - French edition
FE1 - First French edition
FE2 - Second impression of FE
FE3 - Third impression of FE
FE4 - Fourth impression of FE
FESch - Scherbatoff Copy
FES - Stirling copy
FED - Dubois copy
GE - German edition
GE1 - First German edition
GE2 - Corrected reprint of GE
EE - English edition
EE1 - First English edition
EE2 - Revised impression of EE
Select notes: 
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
Differences
No differences
GC - Gutmann's Copy
FE - French edition
FE1 - First French edition
FE2 - Second impression of FE
FE3 - Third impression of FE
FE4 - Fourth impression of FE
FESch - Scherbatoff Copy
FES - Stirling copy
FED - Dubois copy
GE - German edition
GE1 - First German edition
GE2 - Corrected reprint of GE
EE - English edition
EE1 - First English edition
EE2 - Revised impression of EE
Importance
All
Important
Main
Prezentacja
Select 
copy link PDF Main text


  b. 5

Double bar-line in GC

Single bar-line in FE (→EE1)

Repeat sign in GE & EE2

In GC the bars are separated with a double bar line, which is probably an arbitrary change introduced by the copyist (Chopin would rarely insert double bar lines, while changing the tempo or key, however, it was a commonly used practice). In GE the double bar line was arbitrarily changed to a repeat sign. It is not certain whether it is a revision or a mistake caused by a misinterpretation of the manuscript. The change, depriving the repetition of the exposition of its opening motif, was adopted in EE2 and in a vast majority of subsequent collective editions. In the main text we give a single line of FE (→EE1), which almost certainly corresponds to the notation of [A]. One can consider an addition of a slur in the L.H. in this place in the proofreading of FE3 to be another argument confirming the correctness of the text of FE – if Chopin had wanted to omit Grave at the repetition, he would have most probably noticed the absence of a repeat sign, necessary in this situation. 

Learn more »

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions, Changed phrase length

notation: Shorthand & other

Missing markers on sources: FESch, FED, FES