mUltimate Chopin

Op. 22, Polonaise

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. 62

composition: Op. 22, Polonaise

c3 in FE (→GE)

a2 in EE
..

The version of EE is most probably the original version adopted from FE (or merely a Terzverschreibung), corrected in the very FE (→GE) in the last stage of proofreading. The same in b. 206.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Errors in FE , Terzverschreibung error , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 62

composition: Op. 22, Polonaise

..

In FE (→GE1,EE), there is no  restoring e3 on the 7th note of the run from the end. The patent mistake was corrected in GE2 (→GE3). The absence of a respective correction in EE is noteworthy, in which space for an accidental was left before this note. It is likely that the engraver forgot to insert the accidental intended by the reviser. The same in b. 206.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Omissions to cancel alteration , GE revisions , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in EE

b. 62

composition: Op. 22, Polonaise

..

In FE (→GE1), there are no accidentals before the 1st, 3rd and 6th notes under the octave sign, which creates doubt as to their sound (at least theoretically). Corresponding accidentals –  e3,  f3 and  d3 – were added in EE, while the first also in GE2 (→GE3). We also include them in the main text. A similar situation can be found in b. 206.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions , GE revisions

b. 63

composition: Op. 22, Polonaise

 on 4th quaver in FE (→GE1,EE)

between quavers in GE2 (→GE3)

 on 3rd quaver suggested by the editors
..

According to us, it is likely that the  asterisk was accidentally placed a quaver too far in FE. It is suggested by a comparison with analogous bars – wherever a  mark is present (b. 25, 65 and 169), it is placed on the 3rd quaver of the bar. A longer pedal, although harmonically correct, is devoid of the energy emphasising the polonaise rhythm, which is obtained by releasing the pedal on the 3rd quaver. Taking into account the above arguments, in the main text we put  under the 3rd quaver of the bar. The change of the position of the mark in GE2 (→GE3) was probably an attempt to find a compromise between the two versions present in FE.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: GE revisions

b. 67

composition: Op. 22, Polonaise

 in FE (→EE,GE1)

No ornament in GE2 (→GE3)
..

The missing  in GE2 (→GE3) must be an oversight.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE