|
b. 249-253
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt IV
..
Generally speaking, the long accents added in GE are justified – Chopin indicated such a performance in the two preceding four-bar sections, as well as in bars 40-55. He used long, short and vertical accents and category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , EE inaccuracies , |
||||||||
|
b. 249-250
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt IV
..
The divided slurs in IE are probably an inaccuracy related to the transition to a new line. category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||
|
b. 250-253
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt IV
..
In A there are no accidentals to the 1st quaver in bar 250 and 253. In the main text we add cautionary flats, necessary in this context. In bar 250 a flat was also added in GE (→FE,EE,IE). category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: GE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 252
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt IV
..
Sonically and pianistically speaking, both versions are equal. Therefore, at first glance, it is not obvious why Chopin should have abandoned the idea of repeating the chord unchanged, as it is in all analogous places (the omission of the bottom note at the end of bar 248 results from the high position of the L.H. figuration). On the other hand, the A version is not a mistake that occurred at the stage of writing this manuscript – all chords in this bar were planned in this form by the writing person, which is evidenced by the difference in the level at which the ledger lines are placed – in the chords without b, they are placed lower than in the previous ones, hence there is no space for writing this note. However, this fact does not completely rule out Chopin's possible mistake, as it could have happened earlier, in the draft autograph (lost), e.g. while introducing possible corrections. In the main text we keep the A version, as Chopin could have wanted to refer to the chord between bars 149-150. The version of the editions, which does not differ from the remaining analogous fragments in terms of regularity, can be considered an acceptable variant. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Errors of A |
||||||||
|
b. 252-253
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt IV
..
The A slur must be inaccurate, as it only reaches f3 – cf. the endings of the analogous slurs in bars 244-245 and 248-249. Therefore, in the main text we suggest a slur to g3 in bar 253, modelled after those slurs. In GE (→FE,EE,IE) the slur was routinely revised by extending it to the end of the bar. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , GE revisions |
marks (in various configurations). Due to the above, although the very accenting results from the preceding phrases, it is difficult to say which marks would be used here and next to which chords, hence in the main text we neither include the 
3 in 