Issues : Inaccuracies in CK

b. 9-10

composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione

Slur in CJ

Slurs in CK, literal reading

Slur in CB, contextual interpretation of slurs in CJ & CK

..

We interpret the slurs of CK as an attempt to combine the unnecessarily separated slurs. According to us, the beginnings of the slurs of CJ and CK are probably inaccurate, even if they are not that far from the notation of [A2]. We consider the slur of CB to be the accurate interpretation thereof and thus suggest it in the main text. The absence of the slurs in A1 and EL – see b. 5-7.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Balakirev's revisions , Inaccuracies in CK

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. 49

composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione

No sign in A1

in first half of bar in CJ

 in 2nd half of bar in CK (→CB) & EL

..

According to us, it is more likely that this detail was repeated after [A2] more accurately in CJ than in CK (→CB) and EL.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in CK

b. 52

composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione

5+5 semiquavers in A1

3+2+6 semiquavers in CJ & CK

2+3+3+3 semiquavers in CB

5+6 semiquavers in EL

..

In the 1st half of the bar the sextuplet is not marked in A1, neither with a digit nor a slur; however, nothing indicates that Chopin could have meant another rhythm. These elements are also absent in CK, which is almost certainly an oversight of the copyist, whose attention was taken by the need to correct the erroneously written first 5 notes of this sextuplet. In turn, it is uncertain how the oversight of all slurs in EL occurred – see b. 5-6.
Kolberg also overlooked the markings in the 2nd half of the bar, confirmed by CJstaccato dots and the slur over the last beat of the bar. It could have influenced the creation of an arbitrary rhythm and slurring of CB – clearly incomplete slurring of CK and division of the 3rd beat of the bar, musically unjustified without authentic articulation, suggested a possibility of mistakes and inaccuracies in this copy.
The most significant difference appears at the end of this bar – in A1 the 4th beat includes only 5 notes, since there is no e3  between d3 and f3. In the main text we give the later 6-note version on the basis of the most accurate and almost certainly authentic notation of CJ.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Balakirev's revisions , Inaccuracies in CK

b. 55

composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione

No slurs in A1, CJ & EL

Slur in CK

Slurs in CB

..

The slur of CK raises serious doubts in terms of both its range and placement – nowhere else does the slur encompass two such L.H. figures or is placed under the notes. Therefore, it is probably an inaccuracy or a mistake; it may have had something to do with a slur concerning only one of the figures or emphasising the bass sequence: c-A-G. Since it is absent in the principal source – CJ – in the main text we do not include this questionable mark. The slurs of CB are part of a comprehensive revision – see b. 6-19

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors of JC , Balakirev's revisions , Errors in CK , Inaccuracies in CK