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
Rhythm
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

Rhythm

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.

Compare the passage in the sources »

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.

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Editorial revisions

issues: GE revisions

b. 25

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

..

In EE1 the quaver beaming of the last two L.H. octaves was overlooked. The patent oversight was corrected in EE2 (→EE3).

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in EE

b. 29

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

Dotted quaver & demisemiquaver in GE

Quaver & semiquaver in FE (→EE)
..

We give the rhythm of the 1st crotchet in the bar after the rhythmically correct version of GE, conveying almost certainly the text of [A]. FE1 contains an erroneous rhythm missing one demisemiquaver –  (the scheme preserves the alignment of the R.H. part with respect to the L.H. part). According to us, it is most probably an unfinished notation of the rhythm we can see in GE. The correction of FE2 and EE was aimed at removing the insufficiency of the values and was performed by the revisers. This is also the version we adopt as the text of FE1, since it seems that this is how (on the basis of the notes' rhythmic values) this place would be interpreted by the majority of the readers. 

Learn more »

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , FE 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).

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

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