mUltimate Chopin

Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

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. 13-15

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

..

In FE (→EE) the crotchet stems reach only the top notes of the R.H. octaves on the 2nd beat of b. 13 and 14; similarly, in b. 15 it is only the top notes of the octaves that are separated as the top voice on the 3rd beat (in turn, both notes of each of those octaves belong to the bottom voice). It must have resulted from a misunder­standing: Chopin's notation was misunderstood by the copyist or, which is more likely, by the engraver of FE. Chopin would always write stems on the right-hand side of noteheads, which would result in an ambiguous notation in such a situa­tion, e.g. in b. 15: . The fact that Chopin meant to prolong both notes of the octaves is evidenced by the dots prolonging both notes in GE in b. 15 as well as by the dots in all sources in a similar situation in b. 36-40.
In GE the stems were assigned correctly, except bar 15. The sources also differ in the presence of dots prolonging the e2-e3 octave at the beginning of the 3rd beat of b. 15 – in FE1 both are ab­sent, in FE2 and EE1 there is only the top one, while GE and EE2 contain both.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Errors in GE , FE revisions

b. 13-14

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

Crotchets in GE1 & FE (→EE)

Only R.H. crotchets in GE2

Dotted crotchets suggested by the editors
..

In the main text we suggest prolonging the separated R.H. octaves after the authentic notation in analogous situations in b. 37-40. We also suggest prolonging B in b. 13, since there is no visible reason to approach that note differently than the R.H. octave (this figure does not appear in the Polonaise in this form anymore).
While rearranging the layout of the L.H. beams GE2 omitted the additional stem to B in b. 13.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

issues: GE revisions

b. 14-16

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

Slurs separated before 2nd semiquaver in GE

Slurs separated before 1st semiquaver in FE (→EE)

Our suggestion
..

Without access to the manuscripts, it is difficult to say what Chopin's concept concerning the phrase marks in these bars was. A comparison of the sources leads to the conclusion that the differences probably result from the inaccurately written phrase marks in the manuscripts, hence in the main text we suggest a solution combining the most certain, according to us, elements of both versions, corresponding to a natural phrasing.

category imprint: Differences between sources

b. 15

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

..

In FE1 the top notes of the 7th and 8th R.H. semiquavers were printed a second higher (by mistake). Consequently, the 4 last octaves in this bar sound as follows when interpreted literally: d2-e3, e2-f3, e2-e3 and d2-d3. The patent mistake was corrected in FE2 and EE.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , FE revisions

b. 15

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

..

All sources repeated a  (cautionary?) before b2. We omit it in the main text.

category imprint: Editorial revisions