Issues : Inaccuracies in FE
b. 34-35
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
GC has at the end of bar 34, while FE has it at the beginning of that bar. In EE is on the bar line, which probably reflects Chopin's notation in [A1]; GE has the same placement. However, it is obvious that the practical possibility of execution of that dynamic indication only appears in bar 35, with the struck note g. category imprint: Source & stylistic information issues: Inaccuracies in FE |
|||||||||||
b. 41-42
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
In FE, the upper notes of the octaves (c1 and a) are notated as a separate voice. This is probably the result of misunderstanding the niotation of the base text. category imprint: Source & stylistic information issues: Inaccuracies in FE |
|||||||||||
b. 74
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
The slur in FE is doubtless the result of wrong understanding of the hand-written base text, which was perhaps inaccurate. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE |
|||||||||||
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. 156
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
In FE, the note d flat is ascribed to the left hand. This would be possible, were it not for the sustaining of that d flat until the next bar, which makes the division completely impractical. category imprint: Source & stylistic information issues: Inaccuracies in FE |