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
Notation
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

b. 177

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

Fingering written into FEJ

No teaching fingering
..
Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FEJ

b. 177

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

Fingering written into FEJ

No teaching fingering
..
Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FEJ

b. 177-181

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

..

In the main text, we add cautionary accidentals before the 2nd semiquavers in bars 177, 179 and 181 – a  before c2, a  before b1 and a1.

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Editorial revisions

b. 178

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

Fingering written into FEJ

No teaching fingering
..
Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FEJ

b. 178

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

..

Bars 176-181 contain a three-part descending progression. The repetitions of the scheme are generally accurate, except for three- and two-note irregularities at the beginning and end of this section. However, in order to maintain an absolute precision, the 4th semiquaver in bar 178 should be a c2, as a counterpart of d2 in bar 176 and b1 in bar 180, which implies a Terzverschreibung. However, in the main text we leave the version of the sources, since minor irregularities in the course of a progression are not unusual in Chopin's pieces, whereas the absence of [A] does not allow us to confirm a possible mistake. We add a cautionary  before the discussed note in the main text. An accidental was added also in GE2.

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Editorial revisions