mUltimate Chopin

Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt II

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

b. 117-121

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

Slurs in GC

Slur in FE

Slur in GE & EE

Slurs suggested by the editors
..

The slurring of the sources raises doubts here. In FE all slurs starting from bar 121 were overlooked. The slur of GC abruptly ends in bar 117, yet the shape of the ending suggests a continuation. Perhaps it made the engraver of GE combine this slur with the next one in bar 121, which cannot be rationally explained. The identical slur in EE is most probably a result of Chopin proofreading of the base text to this edition, however, also in this case one can assume an inaccuracy, as the part which was added in EE (bars 120-123) is linked with the previous slur, yet it does not reach the last note of the current phrase. In the main text we give the most credible elements of the notation of FE (the slur ending in bar 120) and GC (the new slur from bar 121). The continuous slur of EE may be considered to be an alternative solution, perhaps authentic.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Errors in GE , EE inaccuracies , Authentic corrections of EE

b. 118-120

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

g in chords in GC (→GE), FE3 (→FE4), FESch & EE2

a in FE1 (→FE2→EE1)
..

The version of FE1 (→FE2→EE1) is probably the original version, as it was initially written also in GC, in which it was corrected, probably by Chopin. Interestingly, in GC also the middle crotchets in the R.H. (from f1 to e1) were corrected, which in FE, however, are printed right away in the final version. Therefore, it cannot be excluded that seeing identical chords in the L.H., the copyist considered the crotchets in the R.H. also to be identical. It is even more likely considering the fact that in the manuscrpts only the first of the three bars was written out with notes. The version with g was written also in FESch.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Authentic corrections of FE , Alterations in GC , Authentic corrections in GC , Annotations in FESch

b. 118-120

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

c2 tied in GC & FE (→EE)

c2 repeated in GE
..

Chopin manner of writing ties clearly indicates that the ties combined in Chopin's mind with the note being added, which, due to this fact, was not struck. When interpreted in this way, the notation of GC means sustaining c2 through four bars, as each of the •/• signs replaces the c2 minim together with the preceding it tie. The version of GE is, therefore, a result of misunderstanding of GC.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE

b. 118-120

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

..

The  hairpin is only in GC and GE2. The sign in GC could have been added by Chopin (or overlooked in FE).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions

b. 119-120

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

..

In GC – certainly on the basis of [A] – the bars are written as a repetition of bar 118.

category imprint: Source & stylistic information

issues: Abbreviated notation of A