|
b. 159
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt II
..
It is not certain which pedalling is compatible with Chopin's intention. From the practical point of view, both are possible. category imprint: Differences between sources |
|||||||||||
|
b. 160
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt II
..
No category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , No pedal release mark |
|||||||||||
|
b. 162-163
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt II
..
In the main text, we give the slurs of GC (→GE). Adopting the version with shorter slurs in bars 81-87, one has to adopt the variant without slurs here. category imprint: Differences between sources |
|||||||||||
|
b. 164-168
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt II
..
The slur of GC (→GE) includes only this part of the five-bar-long melodic passage whose performance Chopin assigned to the left hand. It is certainly an inaccuracy, perhaps repeated after [A] (the original version?). In turn, a respective slur in FE is broken at the end of the text's line and most probably it was supposed to be led to the end of the phrase (Chopin could have extended it in [A] already after having prepared GC). There is no doubt it is necessary to embrace the entire passage with a slur, if we take into consideration the authentic slurring of analogous phrases. Both possibilities of starting the slur – from the first or second beat of bar 164 – can be considered to be equal. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , Inaccuracies in GC , Authentic corrections of EE |
|||||||||||
|
b. 168
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt II
..
The version of the sources is probably a left by inaccuracy original version of this bar. Chopin's possible mistake is indicated by the mistake in analogous bar 108. One can assume that initially bars 108, 128 and 168 were repetitions of bars 107, 127 and 167, as bar 92 is a repetition of bar 91. Chopin then changed in [A] bars 108 and 128 (leaving the part of the R.H. in bar 108 without correction – see the commentary to this bar). The fact of unintentionally leaving bar 168 in the original form seems to be highly likely in this situation, as there is no reason to suppose that the link with the next phrase was different in bar 168 than in bar 128, whereas overlooking one out of a few similar places at the time of proofreading was quite frequent for Chopin. The possibility is even more likely due to a possible haplography of the composer in this place – the need of correcting a more serious error could have distracted Chopin from the less significant improvement. Therefore, although both versions seem to be musically possible, in the main text we prioritise the version of analogous bar 128. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Editorial revisions |
on 2nd beat in 
on first beat in 
-a