![](/build/images/logo_left-en.png)
![](/build/images/pl-button.5cab5de0.png)
![](/build/images/pomoc-button.d3d09842.png)
![](/build/images/pomoc-button-en.5098433b.png)
Issues : FE revisions
b. 4-36
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
In A (→#CF) Chopin did not introduce any additional indications over the semibreve rests (bars 4, 12, 23-24, 28 and 36), which was reproduced only in GE2. In FE (→EE) it was the digit 1 that was placed over each single rest, whereas a pair of bars with rests was replaced with a double bar with a two-bar rest provided with the digit 2. In GE1 in each of the discussed bars both rests were provided with the digit 1. A similar notation was introduced in GE3, in which, however, the ones in bar 24 were replaced with twos. In the main text we keep the simple but unequivocal Chopinesque notation. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , FE revisions |
||||||||||||||
b. 4
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 8, Prelude in F♯ minor
..
When interpreted literally, the version of A (→FC→GE1), in which the 4th demisemiquaver on the last beat of the bar is an a category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Omissions to cancel alteration , GE revisions , Errors of A , FE revisions |
||||||||||||||
b. 5-6
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt II
..
According to us, the most likely explanation for the existing discrepancy between the sources based on [A] is the sometimes used by the engravers identification of two (or more) following
Due to this fact, in the main text we give the source and stylistically unquestionable indications of GC (→GE). category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: FE revisions , Hairpins denoting continuation |
||||||||||||||
b. 5-37
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
In this context, the markings with which Chopin provided the crotchets in bars 5, 13, 29 and 37 in A may only denote staccato only, although it is not obvious whether he meant wedges or dots, since they clearly differ from dots (e.g. numerous dots extending minims or crotchets), yet their shape also does not bring to mind wedges or even vertical dashes, which could be easily identified with them. Due to that reason, in the main text we also suggest dots, next to wedges, as an alternative solution. In the remaining sources the notation of A was inaccurately reproduced; GE is an exception; in that edition the notation was unified to a form that is absent in those bars both in A and FC. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , GE revisions , FE revisions , Wedges , Inaccuracies in FC |
||||||||||||||
b. 5-6
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 1, Mazurka in G major
..
The slurs of Afrag and GE are unequivocal; since such a slur is featured in all analogous bars in GE, we give it – as present in [A2] – in the main text. The slur of FE is clearly erroneous, which was corrected in FE2 and EE, most probably on the basis of comparison with b. 1-2. The slur of A1 is problematic; just like the remaining slurs in the 1st line of the manuscript, it reaches the end of the bar, yet its shape suggests that it is supposed to be led to the beginning of the next bar. It is explicitly confirmed by the fact of ending the slur in b. 11 (on a new line) as well as by the unequivocal slur in b. 25-27, corrected by Chopin. In such a context, we interpret the slur of A1 as reaching the 1st quaver in b. 7. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , FE revisions , Uncertain slur continuation , Tenuto slurs |