mUltimate Chopin

Op. 22, Andante spianato

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Inaccuracies in FE

b. 15

composition: Op. 22, Andante spianato

..

In the 2nd half of the bar the L.H. semiquavers are arranged in FE in a way that the last one falls already under f3 in the R.H. The inaccuracy was corrected both in GE and EE.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions

b. 35

composition: Op. 22, Andante spianato

..

In FE (→GE1) there are no accidentals before the 9th R.H. semiquaver and the last L.H. semiquaver. These patent inaccuracies, almost certainly repeated after [A], were corrected in EE and GE2 (→GE3).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , Errors repeated in GE

b. 36-37

composition: Op. 22, Andante spianato

   | in FE (→GE1)

    |  in EE

 | in GE2 (→GE3)

(|), our variant suggestion
..

The missing  at the end of b. 36 in FE (→GE1), although not confusing, seems to be an inaccuracy, so that GE2 (→GE3) added the mark. However, it is quite likely that it was the  mark in b. 37 that was unnecessarily placed by the engraver of FE. Chopin used a similar pedalling on a number of occasions, e.g. in the Nocturne in F Major, Op. 15 No. 1, b. 72-73, the Ballade in F Minor, Op. 52, b. 12-13, the Sonata in B Minor, Op. 58, III mov., b. 118-119. A version without a repeated  mark at the beginning of b. 37 is featured in EE, which, unless it is a mistake, may be a proof that it was added in the last phase of proofreading of FE. In effect, the source versions define two potentially authentic pedallings; therefore, in the main text we suggest a variant solution in which the optional pedal change at the beginning of b. 37 is left at the discretion of the performer. 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Errors in EE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 39

composition: Op. 22, Andante spianato

No indication in FE (→EE)

Quintuplet in GE

Quintuplet suggested by the editors

Septuplet, our alternative suggestion
..

It is unclear how 7 R.H. semiquavers should be grouped, according to Chopin. According to us, the grouping indicated by Chopin in analogous b. 15 is the most likely; a corresponding digit was added in GE. An alternative solution is a septuplet, which is a default interpretation in the face of the absence of other indications.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions

b. 43

composition: Op. 22, Andante spianato

Notation in FE, literal reading

Notation in FE (contextual interpretation→EE)

Our alternative suggestion

Our second alternative suggestion
..

In FE the layout of the R.H. run against the L.H. semiquavers almost certainly does not correspond to the performance intended by Chopin – cf. similar situations in b. 17 and 41, in which the R.H. part was laid out 'at a guess,' without considering its alignment with the L.H. part. Therefore, in the main text we suggest the layout adopted in EE, which suggests the run's tempo comparable to the one of the remaining figures written in small notes. The alternative versions are based on an assumption that, just like in the remaining figures, the notation of [A] indicated the performance manner with the help of the rhythmic values of the remaining notes in the bar, yet in the editions the value of the first a2 was misinterpreted.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE