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

Articulation, Accents, Hairpins

b. 4

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

Long accent in #Wf (→#Wn)

Short accent in EE
..

A precise differentiation between long and short accents, typical of Chopin's notation, and assigning them to the right or left hand is impossible due to the missing autograph and visible inaccuracies of the first editions. In FE, it is possible to observe differences between accents in some cases; it also applies to GE to a lesser extent. In turn, the reviser of EE reproduced almost all accents as short. It is impossible to clearly identify in which places the notation of FE reproduces Chopin's notation faithfully (which can also be imprecise) and in which ones the length of the accent results from a random event or an inaccuracy. We try to reproduce the composer's intention taking into account his habits in this respect, documented by sources in other compositions.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions; Source & stylistic information

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE

b. 5-6

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

3 short accents in FE (→GE,EE)

3 long accents suggested by the editors
..

In all sources, 3 subsequent accents in bars 5-6 are short. We consider it to be an inaccuracy of the engraver and suggest long accents in the main text:

  • long notes – in this case dotted g1 minims – are generally provided with long accents by Chopin;
  • the motif at the end of bar 5 is a repetition of the motif in bar 4, in which a long accent is unquestionable in FE.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , EE inaccuracies

b. 16

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

R.H. long accent in FE (→GE)

No mark in EE1 (→EE2)

L.H. short accent in EE3
..

The missing accent in EE1 (→EE2) is most probably an oversight. The mark was added in EE3; however, it was given the form of a short accent over the L.H. chord (the accent in FE (→GE) is placed under the a2-a3 octave).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in EE

b. 21

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

Hairpin up to 3rd quaver in FE (→GE)

No hairpin in EE1 (→EE2)

Hairpin above R.H. in EE3

Hairpin to 4th quaver suggested by the editors
..

The hairpin placed in FE (→GE) is imprecise: it ends at the level of the 3rd quaver in the bar. We suggest prolonging the mark to the end of the phrase. The engraver of EE1 (→EE2) completely overlooked the hairpin. It was only just the reviser of EE3 that added it (over the R.H.).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Errors in EE

b. 31

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

in FE (→EE)

No indication in GE
..

The missing dynamic markings are most probably a mistake of the engraver of GE.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE