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
Pitch
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

Pitch

b. 130

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

c1-g1 in GE & EE, possible interpretation of GC & FE1 (→FE2→FE3)

c1-a1 in FE4
..

On the 2nd crotchet GC and the previous impressions of FE include in the R.H. the clearly erroneous c1-g1. As in the respective place of the previous bar there was c1-g1 in a similar context, it seems to be required to add a  raising g1 to g1. The addition was actually introduced in EE and GE. However, in the proofreading of FE4 a different changes was performed – g1 was replaced with a1. Both EE and FE4 bear traces of Chopin's intervention, so that each of these versions can be authentic. On the other hand, both sources include changes indicating a revision, hence it is not certain whether and which of them actually comes from Chopin.
In the main text we suggest the version of FE4 due to the unquestionable text at the repetition of this place (bar 170). Cf. bar 131. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , GE revisions , Errors of A , Authentic corrections of FE , Errors of GC

b. 131

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

f in GE, possible interpretation of GC & FE1 (→FE2→FE3,EE1)

e in FE4 & EE2
..

GC and the previous impressions of FE (→EE) include the erroneous f as the top bottom note in the chord on the 2nd crotchet. The mistake was revised in GE, adding a  before this note, which has to be considered to be justified. However, the comparison with analogous bar 171, and, above all, the change introduced – probably by Chopin – in FE4 convinces that the mistake concerned the pitch and not the missing . The version with e was introduced also in EE2, most probably on the basis of FE4. According to us, both here and in the previous bar, we are dealing with Chopin's mistakes in [A].

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE , Errors of GC

b. 140

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

No c1 in GC & FE (→EE1)

c1 in GE & EE2
..

The absence of the c1 note is most probably a result of the unclear notation of [A]. It is indicated by the comparison with analogous bars 138, 178 and 180. The note was added – most probably on the basis of such a comparison – in GE, which was then repeated in EE2. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions , Uncertain notes on ledger lines , Errors of GC

b. 142

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

..

The cautionary flat before c1 was added in FE3 (→FE4), GE and EE2.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Cautionary accidentals

b. 143

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

d1 in GC (→GE) & FE (→EE1)

d1 in EE2
..

Leaving aside the unorthographical notation, the version with d1 (=e1) is not excluded, as far as the sound is concerned. In spite of this, according to us, it is highly likely that the absence of the  returning d1 is Chopin's mistake. It is proved by:

  • the notation of bars 184-185, proving Chopin's care for a precise differentiation of the enharmonic notation of d and e;
  • a high number of situations, in which there is no sign in Chopin's pieces, cancelling the previous alteration; 
  • a flat restoring d1, added in EE in analogous bar 183; the base text to EE1 was corrected by Chopin, hence the addition can come from him.

In the discussed bar 143 a  before d1 is only in EE2. In turn, in GE2 a  was added before c1, which could be considered to be a mechanical error, if it was not for the fact that an identical addition was introduced in bar 183.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Errors in EE , Omissions to cancel alteration , Errors in GE , GE revisions , Errors of GC