mUltimate Chopin

Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : EE revisions

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. 69-70

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

No slur in FE (→GE)

Slur in EE2 (→EE3)
..

The slur of EE2 (→EE3) is an arbitrary addition of the revision.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions

b. 70

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

..

In FE, the semiquaver beam of the bottom voice was led until c2. The mistake was corrected in GE and EE.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions , Rhythmic errors

b. 71

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

..

FE (→GE) repeated the  before a1 in the 2nd half of the bar. The superfluous accidental was removed in EE.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Cautionary accidentals

b. 72

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

Slur to f2 in FE (→GE)

Slur to b1 in EE2 (→EE3)
..

The prolonged slur is a completely arbitrary revision of EE2 (→EE3).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions

b. 84

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

Long accent in FE, contextual interpretation

​​​​​​​ hairpin in GE

Short accent in EE
..

The mark in FE paired with  denotes a long accent in this context. A slight prolongation of the mark in GE made it clearly a  hairpin. EE correctly considered the mark to be an accent and reproduced it as a standard, short accent. The same applies to bar 88. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE