mUltimate Chopin

Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : EE revisions

b. 25

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

..

In FE (→EE1) the  lowering g to g is missing. This patent oversight, probably by Chopin himself, was corrected in EE2.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , Inaccuracies in FE , Errors repeated in EE

b. 26

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

..

In FE the  raising e to e is missing. The patent inaccuracy was corrected in EE.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE

b. 30

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

No trill ending in GE & FE (→EE1)

Trill ending in EE2 (→EE3)

Our variant suggestion
..

The missing small notes in the ending of the trill are probably an inaccuracy of the Chopinesque notation in the first appearance of this motif, hence we add them in brackets after analog. b. 56, 106 and 289, as it was performed in EE2 (→EE3).

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions

b. 31

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

..

FE1 overlooked a quaver flag to the 2nd R.H. octave, f-f1. The mistake was repeated in EE1, and also omitted were the dots prolonging the e-e1 octave. Despite the errors, the correct rhythm results univocally from the alignment of both octaves in relation to the L.H. part. All mistakes were corrected in FE2 and EE2 (→EE3).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

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

b. 33

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

No sign in GE & EE2 (→EE3)

Arpeggio in FE1, contextual interpretation

2 slurs in FE2 & EE1, possible interpretation
..

In FE1 the arpeggio mark (vertical slur) was placed after the octave (on its right-hand side). Such mistakes are not frequent, yet they can be seen in Chopin's first editions, cf., e.g. the Concerto in F minor, Op. 21, III mov., b. 172-173. In FE2 and EE1 a small tie combining the grace note with the bottom note of the following octave was added, which was almost certainly performed by the reviser. Both the slur and tie, forming an incomprehensible combination, were removed in EE2. The missing arpeggio in GE suggests that Chopin added it in the basis for FE or only just at the stage of proofreading that edition.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in GE , Arpeggio – vertical slur