mUltimate Chopin

Op. 43, Tarantella

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. 157

composition: Op. 43, Tarantella

 
 
..

In A the c1-e1 third at the beginning of b.153 (and 161, marked as repeat) is not dotted. The corresponding b. 149 (157) is indecipherable in the charred manuscript; there is no legitimate reason to differentiate them. The augmentation dots in place in FC3 (→FE→IE), GE and EE may well have been added by the copyist, who must have assumed the Chopin had omitted them (as in A Chopin indeed had a few of omissions). 

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

b. 157

composition: Op. 43, Tarantella

..

We add cautionary  before f1 in RH, similarly in EE and GE4.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions , GE revisions

b. 157

composition: Op. 43, Tarantella

 
 
..

In GE1 (→GE2→GE3) in b. 157 there is no dynamic marking  on the first beat.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE

b. 159

composition: Op. 43, Tarantella

..

We add cautionary  lowering d1 to d1 in RH. A similar correction was made in EE.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions

b. 159

composition: Op. 43, Tarantella

..

In A The E-e octave in the second half of bars 151, 155 and 159 in LH is a crotchet without any augmentation dots or rests. It seems more appropriate to complete the rhythm with a rest, just yhe way Chopin notated it in a corresponding bar 163. The augmentation dots found in the discussed bars in #FE3 (→FE#(→IE), GE and EE must have been the copyist's addition.

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