|
b. 475
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
category imprint: Differences between sources |
|||||||||||||
|
b. 476-477
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
No tied H in EE seems to have been overlooked. The GC notation is imprecise - at the end of b. 476 (the last one one the page) there is no tie, but it appears in b. 477. However, in GE the tie was not included. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in EE , Errors in GE , Inaccuracies in GC |
|||||||||||||
|
b. 477-479
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
We present the pedalling of GC (rewritten with an error in GE), as it is difficult to imagine that Chopin omitted it purposefully while preparing FE or the basis for EE. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE |
|||||||||||||
|
b. 479-481
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
Consistent slurs in EE and FE must be authentic, they correspond to articulation and pianistic mini-gestures. A visible correction of the slur in GC proves the copyist's allertness at this moment but it may have been made by Chopin himself. Therefore, we give precedence to GC as it resonates with the energy of the motif that echoes the ending of the just sounded chorale phrase. It is difficult to determine why this correction was not included in GE. Similarly to the previous bars, in GE the slur in RH was repeated in the LH part. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Authentic corrections in GC |
|||||||||||||
|
b. 481-483
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
The beginning of slur in GC may be disputable. Regardless of all possible interpretations of the autograph's notation copied by Gutmann, we adopt the reading which is in its graphic form closest to the manuscript as well as in line with the notation of all corresponding bars. In GE the slur's beginning was read differently; the remaining editions present this version. category imprint: Differences between sources |
in 
