It is difficult to determine whether d
2 in b. 32 and 124 is to be repeated or held with a tie. In b. 31-32 none of the preserved manuscripts contains a tie, hence the notation of this and the previous pair of crotchets (b. 30-31) is clearly different, in spite of the obvious analogy. GE are also devoid of a tie, yet the credibility of this version may be called into question due to the missing slur, which makes it more likely that the engraver or Chopin himself committed a mistake. On the other hand, d2 is clearly held with a tie in FE, in which a tie was added by Chopin in the last stage of proofreading.
It is also in analogous b. 123-124 that the versions of the sources are divergent and not entirely credible: without a tie in AF (→FE→EE) and with a tie in GE, whereby the tie of GE, although placed above the d2 notes, may be a slur placed on the wrong side of the dyad (such transfers of curved lines regardless of their significance was quite frequently performed by the then engravers).
In conclusion, we consider the following to be undoubtedly authentic and credible:
- the version of AF repeating d2 in both places (repeated in EE through a proof copy of FE). At the same time, it is the only source version featuring the same text in both places;
- the version of FE with a tie added in b. 31-32 in the proofreading. Intentionally, the correction could also have concerned b. 123-124: cf. numerous examples of situations in which Chopin probably omitted one of a few analogous places while proofreading the text.
Considering both versions to be generally equivalent, to the main text we suggest the version of AF, compliant in both places. While differentiating between b. 30-31 and 31-32, Chopin could have taken into account a similar difference in the rhythm of the L.H. melody: tied d2 in b. 30-31 corresponds to tied g1, while the repetition in b. 32 – to played c1.
category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations
issues: Errors in GE, Authentic corrections of FE
notation: Rhythm
Back to note