mUltimate Chopin

Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt III

Text Compare Notes Sources Description
Select: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

Articulation, Accents, Hairpins

b. 7-8

composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt III

Two equal  signs in GC

One  in FE

One longer  in GE1

Differing  in GE2mar (→GE2)

One shorter  in EE1

Differing  in EE2
..

The notation of GC, representing the abbreviated notation of [A], indicates, according to us, two  signs. A similar conclusion was reached by the reviser of GE2mar (→GE2), whereas FE and GE1 give a hairpin only in bar 7. Interestingly, in an analogous situation in bars 11-12, all editions put the indications in both bars (yet they differ in the way of considering the pedalling). As far as the range of the signs is concerned, in the main text we adopt the averaged signs of GC and FE, as the present between them one semiquaver difference seems to be unimportant. The longer signs of GE and shorter of EE are probably an inaccuracy of interpretation of the base texts.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions

b. 11-12

composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt III

 in GC (→GE), FE & EE2

No signs in EE1
..

The absence of  signs is probably an oversight of the engraver of EE1, although a possibility of their removal by Chopin in the base text to this edition also cannot be excluded.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in EE

b. 14

composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt III

Long accent in GC

No mark in FE (→EE1)

Short L.H. accent in GE

Long L.H. accent in EE2
..

The accent in GC was probably added by Chopin. In GE, clearly against the manuscript, it was assigned to the L.H. and it was given a shape of a common, short accent. Such placed sign was repeated in EE2.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Authentic corrections in GC

b. 16

composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt III

 in GC & GE2mar (→GE2)

 in FE (→EE)

Accent in GE1
..

It is not clear which of the sources based directly on [A] – GC and FE1 – conveyed the range more accurately and, as a consequence, also the sense of the  hairpin. Both versions have their stylistic advantages and can be convincingly justified, as far as the source aspects are concerned: 

  • The sign in FE clearly emphasises the culminant appogiatura of the melodic line. Chopin could have added it in [A] already after having prepared GC.
  • The sign in GC extends the culmination's release into the entire bar, somehow considering the counterpointing part of the L.H. The sign could have also been added by Chopin, if in [A] there were initially no dynamic signs here.

In the main text we give the  sign according to the base source, i.e. FE. The version of GC can be considered to be an equal variant.

The accent in GE1 is undoubtedly a result of misunderstanding of the notation of GC, which was corrected in GE2mar (→GE2).

Similarly in bars 24, 70 and 78.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions

b. 17-18

composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt III

No signs in GC (→GE) & FE

 & accent in EE

  suggested by the editors
..

The   signs are only in EE, added most probably by Chopin in the base text to this edition. The sign in bar 18, having a form of an accent under the chord on the 2nd beat of the bar, is almost certainly a result of misunderstanding of the entry of Chopin – in the original graphical layout the chords in the L.H. are divided between both staves, as a result of which the  written between the staves can be understood as referring to the L.H. only (similarly in bar 26). In the main text we suggest a much more likely interpretation of these signs, given in EE in the recapitulation (bars 72 and 80).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE inaccuracies , Authentic corrections of EE