|
b. 103
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor category imprint: Differences between sources |
|||||||||||
|
b. 104
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Long accents |
|||||||||||
|
b. 105
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
In FE and EE category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Errors in EE , Terzverschreibung error |
|||||||||||
|
b. 106-108
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
On the basis of extant sources it is difficult to determine whether Chopin wanted to have long or short accents here. In GC, the accents are quite large, yet clearly shorter than those appearing earlier, in bars 92-96 and 99-102. Moving the accents between the staves in GE makes us think that also in EE the accent placement does not necessarily match the notation of the manuscript that served as the base text for it. Lack of any accent in bar 107 in FE is definitely an error. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions |
|||||||||||
|
b. 111-127
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
Cautionary sharps before the octaves on the 2nd beat of bars 111 and 127 were definitely (GE) or very probably (EE) added by revisers. Still, as we find them justified, we include them into the main text. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |
in 
is placed before d sharp1. This obvious error may have been caused by the imprecise notation of the autograph.
