Issues : Placement of markings
|
b. 74-75
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
EE and GC (→GE) have an accent over the tied c sharp2 in bar 74 (in GE the accent is placed under the octave c sharp1-c sharp2). In FE c sharp2 is not tied, and the accent can both be found in bar 74 and at the beginning of bar 75. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Placement of markings |
|||||||||||
|
b. 74-75
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
For our main text we adopt the version appearing in both EE and GC (sustained c sharp2, one accent). Lack of a tie sustaining c sharp2 in FE could be easily considered an omission were it not for an additional accent at the beginning of bar 75, which in a sense confirms the need to repeat the note. Despite all that, we consider errors and misunderstandings to be the most probable source of the version of FE; that view finds confirmation when we make a comparison with analogous bars 416-417, in which FE stays in compliance with the remaining sources. The version of GE results from a routine moving of the accent to the note head side. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Inaccuracies in GE , Placement of markings |
|||||||||||
|
b. 200-203
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
EE is the only source in which the slur for this phrase is in line with its musical sense and with slurring in numerous similar phrases. In FE the slur only reaches the chord in bar 202 and runs under the chords, which is a routine change of the graphic layout employed by engravers. In GC (→GE) the slur was omitted. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Placement of markings , FE revisions , Errors of GC |
|||||||||||
|
b. 216-219
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
As the main text we give the definitely correct slur of EE. The slur of GC is not accurate and, when read literally, it only embraces three bars, which is what we can see in GE. Moreover, GE - just like FE - has the slur moved to the bottom and placed under the note heads. That revision, typically introduced by engravers, is not without influence on the meaning of that articulation mark. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Placement of markings , Inaccuracies in GC |
|||||||||||
|
b. 224-227
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
The consistency of the slurring in EE and GC (→GE) suggests that the slur notation was imprecise in the autograph. For our main text we take the slur of FE as undoubtedly correct. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Placement of markings , EE inaccuracies , Inaccuracies in GC |
