|
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
In GE1 the last note in the L.H. is an erroneous c. The patent mistake was corrected in GE2 (→GE3). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions |
||||||||||||
|
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
In the main text we give the unquestionable slur of A (→FC,FE). The slurs of GE1 and EE were probably shortened under the influence of the slur in the L.H. (see the note below). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |
||||||||||||
|
b. 1-3
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
The L.H. slurs added in bars 1-2, 2-3 in FE are almost certainly inauthentic. They were probably added due to the change of the layout: in the notation of A (→FC→GE), the R.H. part is situated on the bottom stave together with the L.H., as a result of which the slur over the notes naturally concerns both parts. In FE (→EE) the R.H. part was moved to the upper stave; hence the articulation and phrasing of the L.H. was no longer obvious. It could have been noticed by Chopin himself; however, it is difficult to assume that he could have added a slur suggesting a different phrasing of the L.H. An identical addition in GE1, which was not proofread by Chopin, perfectly illustrates the attitude of the engravers or revisers (in GE1 and EE in bars 1-2 it was also the R.H. slur that was adjusted to the L.H. slur, contrary to the Stichvorlagen). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , FE revisions |
||||||||||||
|
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
A is devoid of both the title and dedication (it seems that the aim of the pencilled addition at the top of the 1st page is to identify the manuscript for ordering purposes). In the main text we give them after the complete version of FC (→GE), free from mistakes. FE (→EE1→EE2) omitted the title of nobility of the dedication's addressee; there are also a few mistakes in her name and surname. Moreover, EE1 (→EE2) includes an additional, inauthentic title 'La Méditation.' The collective title page of EE3 omitted both that addition and the dedication; however, the Scherzo was marked as second. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Dedications , Errors in EE , Authentic corrections of FC |
||||||||||||
|
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 22, Andante spianato
..
The missing dot extending the crotchet in the metronome marking in the editions is most probably a mistake. The dot is also imperceptible on the photo of FED, which – provided it is a faithful reflection of the situation – is also an inaccuracy. The slightly calmer tempo indicated by Chopin in FED could have been a teaching comment directed to Miss O'Méara only, hence it cannot be considered a proof of modification of the tempo concept of Andante. Therefore, in the main text we suggest a variant solution. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Errors in FE , Annotations in FED |
= 69 in 
= 69 in 
