WN 37, Lento con gran espressione

The fact that b. 42-43 are marked in CJ and CK as repetition of b. 40-41 generates uncertainty as to the placement of the indications sempre (più) piano and rallent. written in b. 39-41. According to us, the dynamic indication that begins in b. 39 must be continued right away in b. 40-41. In turn, it is not so certain in the case of rallent., which in the notation of CJ seems to be related to adagio in b. 44. Due to this reason, we suggest two possible interpretations for rallent. It may also be the reason for the difference between the sources based on Kolberg's copies – in CB rallent. is in b. 43, whereas in EL – in b. 41.

In the main text we give the literal interpretation of CJ:

• we consider sempre più piano to be a more likely interpretation of [A2] than sempre piano – the latter is a repetition of the indication from b. 34-35, which seems to disturb the continuity of the diminuendo that appears between them. Moreover, it is easier to envision an oversight of one out of two similar words (più and piano) than an addition of a word that is absent in [A2];
• an earlier appearance of rallent. offers greater possibilities to shape it in a deft manner.

In A1  is the only performance indication in this and the next bars until  in b. 57 (except for a few R.H. slurs in b. 52-54). It cannot be ruled out that it could have been influenced by the layout – b. 49-56 fill one line of A1 and both the previous and the next lines abound in such indications. The missing top part of the second  mark makes the interpretation of this marking unobvious; it could also be . A very characteristic horizontal line, common for both letters (cf., e.g. four  on the 1st page of A in the Scherzo in B Minor, Op. 31) is an argument in favour of .
In the main text we give the mark of the later version. 

The indication appassionato is written in full only in CB. The remaining sources coming from [A2] feature appass.

In A1 Chopin wrote the  indication between the 2nd and 4th notes of the run. It is an example of the obsolete convention of placing indications within their scope, and not at the beginning or slightly before (cf. b. 58). The following dynamic hairpins differ in their range, which, however, is of no significance in this context. In the main text we reproduce the notation of CJ, which does not raise any stylistic doubts and probably reproduces the notation of [A2] pretty faithfully. The hairpins of EL adjusted to the semiquaver beaming must result from an editorial revision.

In A1 both indications –  and velociss. – are written close to the middle of the 2nd half of the bar, which certainly does not directly translate into the performance in this context – neither  nor velociss. can start to be valid only just in the second quarter of the run, where they are placed. Therefore, it is a striking example of indications placed near the middle of their scope; therefore, in the substantive transcription of A1 we move them to the beginning of the run. The fact that sempre più piano was placed in CJ and CK under the bottom stave probably corresponds to the notation of [A2]; however, it could have been forced by the lack of space between the staves. According to us, this indication applies not only to the L.H. part, but to the entire musical course in a longer perspective than the   hairpins, which concern the run only – cf. the indications in the next bars: delicato, delicatissimo,  and . The changes and additions performed to the indication in CB and EL cannot be authentic.