mUltimate Chopin

Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : GE revisions

b. 34

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

..

In FE (–>EE1) there is no  to the bottom note of the last L.H. octave. The patent oversight, most probably by Chopin, was corrected in EE2 (→EE3). The correct notation is also to be found in GE.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

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

b. 41

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

..

In FE (→EE1) there is no  restoring g2 in the last octave in the bar. The mistake was corrected in EE2 (→EE3) by adding sharps next to both notes of that octave; the same notation can be found in GE. In the main text we include only the necessary  next to g2. Likewise in b. 67.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Omissions to cancel alteration , GE revisions , Errors repeated in FE , Errors repeated in EE

b. 43

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

Quaver c2 in GE1 & FE (→EE)

Crotchet c2 in GE2
..

The c2 note having been separated from the 1st chord is an arbitrary revision of GE2. Actually, on the 1st beat of analogous b. 69 the stems are pointing upwards in GE1 and FE (→EE), yet in both places the first chord in those editions is written down using one-part notation. In FE the visible traces of corrections in print suggest that initially the stems on the 1st beat of the discussed bar were also pointing upwards, which was, however, changed – perhaps by Chopin – to a form compliant with the notation of GE.
A similar situation is to be found in b. 276. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions

b. 61-64

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

Slurs from E to g in GE1 (contextual interpretation) & FE (→EE)

Slurs from F1 to a in GE2

Slurs from E to a, our alternative suggestion
..

In the main text we give the unquestionable slurs of FE (→EE). The fact that the slurs of GE1 begin earlier can reflect the inaccurate notation of [A], which most probably marked slurs of the same range. The version of GE2 must be arbitrary. Our alternative suggestion is based on an assumption that the endings of the slurs could have been routinely revised by the engravers.
The same applies to b. 294-297.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions

b. 67

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

..

As was the case with b. 41, in FE (→EE1) there is no  restoring g2 in the last octave in the bar. The mistake was corrected in EE2 (→EE3), where sharps were added next to both notes of that octave. The same version is in GE, which is also almost certainly an editorial revision, since these accidentals are absent in b. 274 and 300, which were marked in [A] in an abridged manner as a repetition of b. 41 and 67 and, consequently, could not differ from them.
In the main text we add only the necessary  next to g2.   

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Omissions to cancel alteration , GE revisions , Errors repeated in FE , Errors repeated in EE