Issues : Inaccuracies in GE
|
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. 560-579
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
The slurs encompassing the ostinato quaver figures in A are of different length: some reach the following crotchet, some do not. Statistically, it is the former that clearly prevail: 8 longer, 6-note slurs to only 4 shorter and 3 questionable ones (we interpret the questionable ones literally as short). The remaining sources do not show traces of Chopin's influence on the range of those slurs; except for minor inaccuracies, FC and GE1 reproduce the text of their Stichvorlagen, while FE (→EE) contain longer slurs only (we discuss b. 574-575 separately due to FE having overlooked the slur). In this situation, we base the main text on the above analysis of the notation of A; taking into account a high degree of structural and functional similarity of the discussed motifs, we suggest uniform, 6-note slurs in all figures. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Inaccurate slurs in A , GE revisions , EE inaccuracies , Uncertain slur continuation |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
b. 589-590
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
In accordance with the analysis of the Chopinesque category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions , EE inaccuracies |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
b. 631-632
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
In both manuscripts the slur clearly reaches b. 632, although due to the absence of text in this bar – b. 632 opens a section written in an abbreviated manner as repetition of b. 181-244 – it may be considered an inaccuracy. It was regarded as such both in FE and GE. In turn, EE contain the correct slur, probably under the influence of b. 180-181. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE |
in 
marks in this and analogous pairs of bars (see 
