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. 216

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

Slur in GC (→GE) & EE2

No slur in FE (→EE1)
..

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE

b. 216-217

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

..

The slur over the pair of octaves is overlooked in FE1. The mistake was corrected already in FE2.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , FE revisions

b. 219

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

c3 in GC (→GE) & EE2

No c3 in chord in FE (→EE1)
..

The absence of the c3 note in the 2nd chord is certainly an oversight of the engraver of FE (→EE1) – the note is present in respective bar 31, whereas the recapitulation was most probably not written out in [A]. Similarly in the next bar.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE

b. 219

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

No mark in the sources

Accent suggested by the editors
..

As in bar 31, in the main text we suggest an accent in line with the analogous bar 11.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

b. 220-222

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

No arpeggio signs in the sources

Arpeggio signs suggested by the editors
..

Chopin did not mark here the arpeggios of the tenth chords in the L.H. In spite of this, on the basis of a few signs appearing in analogous bars, we suggest an alternative notation with marked arpeggios.

category imprint: Interpretations within context