Issues : Inaccuracies in FE
b. 6-7
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
The analysis of the or markings, written by Chopin in A in these and analogous bars, leads to the conclusion that, despite significant differences in length (from a long accent to a two-bar hairpin), all of them most probably denote long accents. Due to that reason, in the main text we decided to unify them; we adopted a compromise marking, which is more or less one-bar long. In the remaining sources Chopin did not interfere with the shape of those markings. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions |
||||||||||||
b. 30-31
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
The interpretation of the notation of A is problematic here: b. 30 ends the line, and the mark goes far beyond the bar line (in b. 31 there is already no mark). We assume that it is a one-and-a-half-bar mark, like in GE2 (→GE3). In the main text, in accordance with the analysis of the Chopinesque or marks in this and analog. pairs of bars (see b. 6-7), we give here an averaged, more or less one-bar hairpin of EE. According to us, all marks, regardless of their actual length, should be interpreted here as long accents. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions , Inaccuracies in FC |
||||||||||||
b. 73
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
The only undoubtedly authentic notation is the notation of A (→FE). According to us, the use of a long grace note does not influence the performance: it is most likely that it is to be performed as a short, unaccented grace note; if we take into account the slur, we may assume that it is simply an arpeggio whose bottom note does not need to be held with hand. The notation of FC may also be authentic; Chopin could have changed therein the type of the grace note used (the missing slur is almost certainly an oversight). After adding the slur, the notation with a slashed quaver (used in GE2 (→GE3) and clear in terms of performance) may be considered a rightful alternative version. The change introduced in EE is probably arbitrary. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , Inaccuracies in FC |
||||||||||||
b. 110-112
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
The pedalling in these bars was added later: undoubtedly by Chopin in the proofreading of FE (→EE). However, one can have doubts whether the intention of Chopin's proof entry was interpreted correctly, since there is no reason to release pedals in the middle of the bar instead of at the end of it, like in all the remaining bars. Consequently, in the main text we give the version of GE2 (→GE3) modelled after the Chopinesque entry in FC in analog. b. 242-244. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||||||||
b. 129
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
It seems unlikely that the wedge in FE (→EE) could reflect Chopin's intention: A clearly features a dot both in this bar and in analog. b. 261. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE |