Issues : Scope of dynamic hairpins

b. 16

composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt III

 in GC & GE2mar (→GE2)

 in FE (→EE)

Accent in GE1

..

It is not clear which of the sources based directly on [A] – GC and FE1 – conveyed the range more accurately and, as a consequence, also the sense of the  hairpin. Both versions have their stylistic advantages and can be convincingly justified, as far as the source aspects are concerned: 

  • The sign in FE clearly emphasises the culminant appogiatura of the melodic line. Chopin could have added it in [A] already after having prepared GC.
  • The sign in GC extends the culmination's release into the entire bar, somehow considering the counterpointing part of the L.H. The sign could have also been added by Chopin, if in [A] there were initially no dynamic signs here.

In the main text we give the  sign according to the base source, i.e. FE. The version of GC can be considered to be an equal variant.

The accent in GE1 is undoubtedly a result of misunderstanding of the notation of GC, which was corrected in GE2mar (→GE2).

Similarly in bars 24, 70 and 78.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions

b. 16

composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt I

in GC

 in FE (→ EE1)

in GE

in EE2

..

The differences between GC, FE (→EE1) and GE seem to be accidental inaccuracies. The solution we suggest in the main text is an attempt to reconstruct [A] on the basis of the discrepancies between GC and FE. The same range of the  hairpin was introduced in EE2 - probably on the basis of a comparison of FE with GE.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , EE inaccuracies , Inaccuracies in GC

b. 16

composition: Op. 28 No. 4, Prelude in E minor

No hairpins in As & EE1

  in A, contextual interpretation

  in FC (→GE) & EE2

  in FE

  in CGS

..

The range of the   hairpins in A is unclear, since the  is written at the end of the line, practically already beyond the bar line. In spite of that, diminuendo must concern also b. 16, since at the beginning of b. 17 we can already see a new sign – . This is how it was interpreted both in FC (→GE) and FE (with a slight difference in the range), and this is the interpretation we give in the main text. The absence of the marks in EE1 is most probably a mistake of the engraver, rectified in EE2 on the basis of a comparison with GE1, which is indicated by the compliance of the range of the marks. The hairpins in CGS are most probably inaccurately outlined marks of FE.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Source & stylistic information

issues: EE revisions , Scope of dynamic hairpins , Errors in EE , FE revisions , Fontana's revisions , Inaccuracies in A

b. 16-19

composition: Op. 28 No. 14, Prelude in E♭ minor

2 signs in bars 16-19 in A

2 signs in bars 16-17 in FC (→GE)

1 sign in bars 16-19 in FE (→EE)

..

In A b. 16 ends a line, while the  hairpin ends quite clearly beyond the bar line. Perhaps this was the reason it was combined with the mark in b. 17-19, which resulted in one long . According to us, such an interpretation is unjustified, since in two previous lines the hairpins in A also go beyond the bar line, which is almost certainly merely an inaccuracy (cf. also the inaccurate, overlapping marks in b. 5-6 and 9). Therefore, in the main text we keep the separate marks, particularly since the latter begins only just on the 2nd beat of b. 17. It was also Fontana that did not reproduce the notation of A correctly, since he started writing the mark in b. 17 already at the beginning of the bar, but did not write its ending in b. 18-19.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins , FE revisions , Errors of FC , Inaccuracies in FC

b. 17

composition: Op. 25 No 1, Etude in A♭ major

Long accent in AI

  in A (→GE1GE1a)

  in FE

  in EE

  in GE2 (→GE3)

..

In all sources related to the publication process of the Etude (A and editions), the bar is provided with a pair of dynamic hairpins. However, the sources or their groups differ quite significantly, as far as the range of the signs is concerned. In the main text, we give the signs of FE, showing similarity to the indications in analogous bar 19. Chopin could have written such hairpins in the base text to FE or added while proofreading this edition. GE2 (→GE3) also include a similar version, probably revised on the basis of comparison with bar 19.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins