Issues : Inaccuracies in FC
|
b. 543-544
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
When interpreted literally, the slur of FC goes under the rest and ends on the treble clef at the end of b. 543. It misled the engraver of GE1; he assumed that the slur was supposed to reach the octave in b. 544. The nonsensical slur was removed in GE2 (in FC and GE1 there are no slurs in the previous bars) and restored, already in its correct form, in GE3. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions , Inaccuracies in FC |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
b. 552-559
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
In A the slurs over the characteristic quaver motifs generally encompass only the quaver groups in these bars (the only exception are the slurs in b. 554-555, reaching the crotchet at the beginning of the next bar). The remaining sources do not show traces of Chopin's influence on the range of those slurs. Therefore, taking into account the fact that the discussed figures are identical, in every respect, in the main text we unify the slurs, giving always the ones Chopin wrote in A more often. Such a solution was also adopted in GE2 (→GE3). Alternatively, we also suggest 6-note slurs, which are more frequent in similar motifs in the entire Scherzo. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Inaccurate slurs in A , GE revisions , EE inaccuracies , Inaccuracies in FC , Uncertain slur continuation |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
b. 588-620
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
Differently than in the two previous appearances of this theme (b. 5-37 and 137-169), in b. 588, 596, 612 and 620 there are no wedges at all in A. In turn, Chopin twice introduced separate marks for the L.H., which we consider to be determinant for the entire fragment. The use of double marking could have been related to the presence of longer, tied notes in the preceding motifs. The same unification was introduced in GE, whereas the notation of FC and FE (→EE) has to be regarded as inaccurate or erroneous. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Errors in FE , GE revisions , Wedges , Inaccuracies in FC |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
b. 592-624
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
Among the R.H. chords in b. 592, 600, 616 and 624, it is only the one in b. 600 that is provided with an unequivocal staccato mark (dot) in A (and in the remaining sources). B. 592 could also contain a dot; however, the potential mark is quite far from the chord and blends with the end of the slur; it was repeated neither in FC nor in FE. The missing marks are most probably an inaccuracy, hence in the main text we suggest dots in all four places. Such an addition was also introduced in GE2 (→GE3). category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Inaccuracies in FC , Inaccuracies in A |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
b. 597-598
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
In accordance with the analysis of the Chopinesque category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions , Inaccuracies in FC |
in 
marks in this and analogous pairs of bars (see