|
b. 182
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt II
..
In GC and FE (→EE1) the category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Errors in EE , GE revisions , FE revisions , Errors of GC |
||||||||||||||||
|
b. 183
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt II
..
The version with d1 (=e category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Omissions to cancel alteration , Errors in GE , GE revisions , Errors of GC , Authentic corrections of EE |
||||||||||||||||
|
b. 189-193
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt II
..
In GC the majority of the recapitulation (bars 190-257) is written in an abbreviated manner as empty, numerated bars (the numbers correspond with the numbers of bars 2-69 of the first section of Scherzo). In bar 189 the notes are written, yet without any performance indications (except for tempo primo), which was probably supposed to be only an additional indication, from which bar one is to begin repeating the full notation. In spite of this, GE printed in this bar only this version, devoid of articulation signs (cf. the note on them). category imprint: Source & stylistic information issues: Abbreviated notation of A |
||||||||||||||||
|
b. 189
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt II
..
The absence of articulation and dynamic indications in GE is a result of misunderstanding of the abbreviated notation of GC. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE |
||||||||||||||||
|
b. 189
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt II
..
In the main text we give the indication its conventional form. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions |
before the top most note is already before the 1st chord. It is hard to say how the mistake, which had to be already in [A], occurred (corrections?). In addition, in the proofreading of 
before c
1. It is either a mistake of the engraver or a missed revision. In 
1) is probably erroneous – situations in which there is no sign, cancelling the previous alteration, belong to the most frequently encountered inaccuracies of Chopin's notation. Moreover, it is likely that the composer rectified his mistake, while correcting the base text to 
in 
