mUltimate Chopin

Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

Text Compare Notes Sources Description
Select: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Slurs
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

Slurs

b. 40

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

Slur to f2 in FE (→EE)

Slur to f3 in GE
..

In FE (→EE), leading the slur until the f2 semiquaver, from which, at the same time, a new slur begins, is probably an inaccuracy – Chopin did not encompass the entire phrase with one slur, as he did two bars later, hence it is difficult to asume that he would have wanted to obliterate a natural division of the phrase, marked by a temporary interruption of the semiquaver movement. Therefore, in the main text we include the shortening of the slur introduced in GE.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions

b. 40

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

Slur from b in FE

Slur from 2nd beat in GE & EE
..

It is uncertain whether the slur of FE accurately conveys the notation of [A], so it cannot be excluded that it is the slur of GE and EE, compliant with the R.H. slur, that corresponds to it. In the main text, however, we leave the version of FE, since by the repetition of this phrase (bar 42), the slur also begins from the 4th quaver of the bar.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Editorial revisions

b. 42

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

Slur from bB in FE (→GE,EE)

Slur from 2nd beat, our alternative suggestion
..

In the main text, we preserve the source slur, in spite of the fact that its starting point may be considered inaccurate – see bar 40. We suggest a version modelled after an alternative interpretation of the slur in bar 40 as an acceptable variant of slurring.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Editorial revisions

b. 44-49

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

Different slurs in FE

Different slurs in GE

Different slurs in EE

Slurs from 1st note (contextual interpretation)

Slurs from 2nd note, "statistical" interpretation
..

In bars 44, 46 and 48-49, each of the semiquaver groups separated with beams (or ended with a quaver) is provided in the sources with a slur that begins either from the second or the first note, which is significantly less frequent. The differences are definitely of a random nature; we consider the slurs running from the 1st note to be corresponding to Chopin's intention, since they are more natural in terms of both musical and pianistic issues.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Editorial revisions

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , EE inaccuracies

b. 52-62

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

No slurs in FE (→GE,EE1)

Slur in EE2 (→EE3)
..

The slurs under the bass B-E motifs in bars 52-54, 56-57 and 60-62 are an arbitrary addition of EE2 (→EE3). Authentic slurs in such a context are present in analogous bars 360-370; therefore, it is likely that the quavers in the discussed bars should also be performed in such a way. However, a different performance cannot be ruled out, e.g. staccato – cf. similar motifs in bars 68-69 and 72-73. In the Polonaise in A Major, Op. 53, similar motifs constitute the framework of the main theme's accompaniment (bars 17-19 and analog.) and are provided alternately with slurs or dots.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions