mUltimate Chopin

Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Errors of GC

b. 203-230

composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor

Slurs in EE & FE

Slurs in GC, possible contextual interpretation

Slurs in GE
..

The interpretation of slur beginnings in GC is as difficult here as it was in the case of bar 159 and analogous bars – the slurs begin on the first crotchet. Only in bar 219, the last one in the system, the slur is missing altogether which is doubtless due to oversight, as the slur in 220 suggests continuation. In GE, three out of four slurs begin on the quavers (and also slurs were added for the L.H.). In our main text we give the slurring of EE and FE, as it is both convincing and error-free.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Errors of GC

b. 208-211

composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor

Slur in EE

Slur in GC, the simplest reading

Slur in FE

Slur in GE
..

EE is the only source in which the slur corresponds with natural phrasing in those bars. In FE the slur ends on the last chord of bar 210. In GC it abruptly ends with the end of the line, which in GE was interpreted logically, yet without taking into account the context of similar places. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors of GC

b. 223

composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor

 in FE

No mark in EE & GC (→GE)
..

The fact that  is missing both from EE and from GC (→GE) suggests that the asterisk was already omitted in the autograph. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in EE , Errors of GC

b. 243-249

composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor

Hairpins in EE

GC (→GE)

FE

FE, possible interpretation
..

Differences between the sources as far as the range of the hairpin mark is concerned, although pronounced, are most probably accidental. Somewhat delayed (bar 244) beginning of the  mark in GC (→GE) has no practical significance, while embracing bar 247 with the  is almost definitely Gutmann's mistake, as he made many such errors in his copies. Two  marks in FE are probably to be understood as one; in Chopin's times, the old convention was sometimes in use in which continuation of a dynamic change in a new line of text was marked with the same mark as a new dynamic change would be. In our main text we propose the marks of FE interpreted according to that convention. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors of GC

b. 252-257

composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor

Pedalling in EE

GC (→GE)
 

Our variant suggestion
..

The only difference between the pedalling of EE and FE is the presence or absence of the pedal change at the beginning of bar 253. We include both those options in our main text as variants. The pedalling of GC (→GE) may also be authentic (cf. pedal marks in EE in bars 259-265), but the copyist's error is just as plausible, as he may have written here the pedalling for the next line of text (from bars 259-265, in which GC has no pedal marks at all).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors of GC