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. 234-235

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

Slur in bar 235 in FE (→GE,EE)

Longer slur suggested by the editors
..

category imprint: Editorial revisions

issues: Inaccuracies in FE

b. 234

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

Slur to a1 in FE (→GE,EE)

Slur to b2 suggested by the editors
..

category imprint: Editorial revisions

issues: Inaccuracies in FE

b. 235

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

Hairpin in FE (→GE) & EE3

No mark in EE1 (→EE2)
..

The missing ​​​​​​​ hairpin in EE1 (→EE2) is a mistake of the engraver. The mark was added only just by the reviser of EE3.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in EE

b. 236

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

in FE (→EE)

in GE
..

GE has a  occurring in GE instead of  could be a mistake, but it seems more probable that it is a revision based on the analogy with bar 240.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , fz – f

b. 236

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

Long accent in FE, contextual interpretation

Hairpin in GE

Short accent in EE
..

The mark placed in FE could be interpreted as a ​​​​​​​ hairpin, as in GE where it was even extended. However, in this context, it is most probably a long accent. The reviser of EE also recognized an accent in it, and reproduced it as a standard, short one. Similarly in bar 240.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE