mUltimate Chopin

Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Errors in EE

b. 17-18

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

..

In FE (→EE) the L.H. part octaves (from the 2nd beat of b. 17 to the end of the 1st beat of b. 18) are written in a simplified way with the use of con 8va. In the process, in FE both ties to F1-F in b. 17 were given, whereas in EE only the top one. According to us, it is the version of FE that corresponds probably to the notation of [A], while in GE the abbreviations were expanded. There is a similar situation in all four analogous places. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in EE , Abbreviated octaves' notation

b. 18-30

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

 in GE

in FE

 &  in EE
..

All trills in b. 18, 20 and 30 are written in GE without the wavy lines indicating that an entire rhythmic value of the trilled note should be filled with the trill. In the main text we follow the more suggestive version of notation of FE (→EE), whereby in EE the wavy line in b. 18 was overlooked.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in EE

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).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in EE

b. 29

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

Slur over grace note in GE, literal reading

Arpeggio sign in GE, contextual interpretation

Slur under grace note (= tie) in FE, interpretation

No sign in EE
..

The reason for the differences in the notation of the ornament preceding the d2-d3 octave is most probably the Chopinesque manner of writing down arpeggios, which would often lose their wavy nature in his manuscripts, thus resembling vertical curved lines. In GE that notation was reproduced quasi-literally, while in FE it was considered a conventional mark combining the grace note with the main note, in this case with the one closest to the grace note, i.e. the bottom note of the octave (the absence of the mark in EE must be an oversight). Consequently, when interpreted literally, the notation of GE means a grace note without an arpeggio, whereas in FE a grace note attached to the bottom note of the octave, which results in an arpeggio without a grace note. In the main text we give the most likely notation, featured in the sources several more times in analogous places, i.e. a grace note and an arpeggio. Such a solution is also supported by the 3rd finger indicated for the grace note in GE – this fingering is natural and comfortable only if we include the arpeggio.   

category imprint: Differences between sources

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

b. 30

composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor

Arpeggio and slur in GE

Slur in FE

No mark in EE
..

The version of GE could have resulted from a double interpretation of the mark resembling a vertical curved line (with which Chopin most probably marked the arpeggio in [A]). Engravers would often work in stages, i.e. an entire page of noteheads, then beams, slurs, ornaments, etc., hence it is likely that the slur was engraved at the stage of slurs, while the arpeggio at the stage of ornaments.
The missing slur in EE must be an oversight of the engraver.

category imprint: Differences between sources

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