Issues : Errors of FC
|
b. 548-551
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
Four accents under the bass octaves were not reproduced in such a form in any of the remaining sources. While GE2 (→GE3) contains all accents, they are placed above the octaves, which is a revision of the text of GE1 on the basis of a comparison with FC and unification by analogy (an accent was added in b. 551, which is absent in FC). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Errors in GE , GE revisions , Errors of FC |
||||||||
|
b. 556
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Errors of FC |
||||||||
|
b. 573-576
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
A missing accent at the beginning of each of these 4 bars may be an oversight of Fontana. According to us, it is, however, more likely that Chopin added the accents in A after FC had already been prepared. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Corrections in A , Errors of FC |
||||||||
|
b. 732
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors of FC |
||||||||
|
b. 756-760
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
The missing staccato dot in b. 756 in FC (→GE1) is most probably an oversight. It was also the dot in b. 760 that was overlooked in GE1, which, most probably, is also an oversight. By adding both dots, the reviser of GE2 correctly guessed Chopin's intention. In turn, the origin of the version of GE3 is puzzling, since there is no acceptable reason to remove the dot in b. 760. Consequently, it is either an erroneous revision or a misprint. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions , Errors of FC |
