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. 1

composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione

 in A1

 in CJ, CK (→CB) & EL
..

The  time signature present in A1 seems to be more accurate for the melody written with minims and the quaver accompaniment. However, later in the piece, with numerous changes of time signature, it always returns as . Therefore, it seems that Chopin eventually opted for , which is confirmed by the copies based on [A2] – CJ and CK, in which this time signature was present from the beginning of the piece.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: 4/4 or 2/2

b. 1-3

composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione

c in A1

C in CJ, CK (→CB) & EL
..

The version of the later sources must be a Chopinesque improvement – it is common to encounter bass notes having been lowered by an octave (or an added bottom octave) throughout the work on a piece in his output, e.g. in the Mazurka in C Minor, Op. 50 No. 3, b. 77, 79 and analog. or in the Etude in A Major, Op. 25 No. 1, b. 1. 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Accompaniment changes

b. 1-4

composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione

..

B. 3-4 are not written out in CJ and CK but marked with a repeat sign after b. 2 and additionally with a slur provided with the indication bis, encompassing b. 1-2. Chopin must have used such a notation in [A2].

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Abbreviated notation of A

b. 1

composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione

 in A1, IJ & CK (→CB)

No indication in CJ

in EL
..

 in A1 is one of the three only verbal indications in b. 1-20 (along with con forza in b. 15 and  in b. 18). The number of other dynamic markings is also significantly lower – see b. 6-7.
The absence of the indication in CJ is an oversight – it is present in CK and IJ, based on [A2], just like CJ.  in EL is an arbitrary change of Kolberg or the publisher.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors of JC , Revisions in EL

b. 1-4

composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione

3 slurs in A1

No slurs in CJ, CK (→CB) & EL

4 slurs suggested by the editors
..

The fact that in b. 3 an analogous slur to the first slur in b. 1 is missing is, according to us, an inaccuracy of A1 resulting from the working nature of this manuscript, prepared for private use. In turn, the absence of the slurs in [A2] (→CJ,CK) was probably a side effect of the abridged notation of b. 3-4 – upon seeing the slur over b. 1-2, which, formally, indicated only the need for them to be repeated, Chopin could have forgone writing additional slurs in order not to complicate the notation in the densely written autograph. Therefore, in the main text we give the slurs of A1 along with the slur in b. 3. We recommend using this addition also when choosing the text of A1. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions