According to us, there is a strong likelihood that the version of the sources is erroneous:
- the orchestral part of FEorch reveals a very likely mistake in the notation of the rhythm in this place – violins I perform a dotted rhythm while cellos – equal semiquavers, which, in such situations, may cause, at most, an impression of irregularity (lack of synchronisation). This discrepancy was corrected already in GEorch, by introducing dotted rhythm also in cellos; the fact that it was almost certainly an adequate correction is proven by MFrorch, in which the rhythm is featured in both discussed parts;
- the difference with respect to analogous bar 373 is almost imperceptible and it seems questionable that Chopin could have introduced it on purpose (a similar mistake could have also occurred in bar 61).
- a dotted rhythm appears – always on the 2nd beat of the bar – also later, in bars 381, 383 and 385.
In the Chopinesque scores, the L.H. part is written always directly over the cellos, which, at a given stage of development of FE, could have contributed to repeating a mistake committed in one of those parts.
One can also add that when such rhythms are featured against triplets, both their forms may mean the same performance according to Chopin's notation – the second semiquaver, or demisemiquaver, falls together with the third note of the triplet like, e.g. in the Ballade in F Minor, Op. 52, bars 217-
220, 223 and 225.
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Editorial revisions
issues: Dotted or even rhythm
notation: Rhythm
