Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
b. 602-603
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
For the main text we adopt the musically indisputable GC hairpins (→GE2, omitted in GE1). The corresponding mark in EE seems to be placed inaccurately - crescendo on the the resounding chord is in fact impossible to execute on the grand piano. No sign in FE may indicate a less carerful edition of execution markings in [A2] (cf. annotation to b. 373)
category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , EE inaccuracies |
||||||
b. 607-611
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
In bars 607 and 611 in EE, there are (short) accents both in the LH and RH parts. It is uncertain that such a version is authentic (cf. 606-620). The accents in GC (marked in bars 575 and 579) may be interpreted both as long or short. In GE they were read as short ones. For the main text we adopt the long accents of FE. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Long accents , EE revisions |
||||||
b. 617
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
In the main text we present a short accent based on GC (→GE). In EE the mark is placed below the note, which most probably does not correspond with the manuscript. In FE the accent is long and it is uncertain whether it applies to RH only. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents |
||||||
b. 619
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
For the main text we adopt the FE long accent. Chopin many times emphasised a falling minor semitone motif, e.g. in Polonaise E, Op. 22, b. 119. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents |
||||||
b. 621
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor category imprint: Differences between sources |