mUltimate Chopin

WN 37, Lento con gran espressione

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. 15

composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione

Slur in A1

Slur in CJ

Slur in CK

No slur in CB & EL

Slur over 4th beat suggested by the editors
..

The slurs of the sources, encompassing neither melodically nor rhythmically distinctive fragments of the scale, are probably inaccurate. This conclusion is confirmed by the slur of CK, encompassing the 4th beat of the bar, in analogous b. 48, and this is the slur we suggest in the main text as a contextual interpretation of the source slurs. Nevertheless, encompassing with a slur the final fragment of a figuration only seems to be illogical, regardless of its actual range. According to us, it is likely that the articulation of this sequence is defined by two indications present in this bar both in A1 and [A2] (→CJ,CK) – con forza at the beginning and the slur at the end. 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , Inaccuracies in JC , Inaccuracies in CK

b. 16

composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione

..

In A1 one can see a correction of the 2nd accompaniment figure in this bar. Initially, Chopin simply moved the hand an octave lower: .

category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Deletions in A , Corrections of AI

b. 16

composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione

No markings in A1 & CB

Pause in CK & EL

Slur & long accent suggested by the editors
..

The indications concerning the a1 note at the beginning of the bar raise serious doubts due to the sources based on [A2] being incompatible – CJ and CK. In the main text we give an interpretation of the notation of CJ, in which both visible elements – slur and short  hairpin – can be quite easily and reasonably interpreted as a tenuto mark and a long accent. In turn, in CK the similarly placed yet much smaller elements actually resemble a fermata (this is how they were reproduced in EL), which is completely unjustified in this place.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Errors in CK

b. 16

composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione

Semibreve in A1, CJ & CK (→CB)

Tied minim & quaver in EL
..

Just like in the case of other interventions concerning the pitch/rhythm, the arbitrary change of the rhythm of this bar was most probably performed by Oskar Kolberg.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Kolberg's revisions

b. 17

composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione

2 L.H. slurs in A1 & CB

No slurs in CJ, CK & EL
..

We do not suggest the slurs of A1 in the main text, since Chopin replaced them in [A2] (→CJ,CK) by the indication legato.

category imprint: Differences between sources