Main text
compare
|
No accidental in the sources (g |
|
|
g |
|
|
g1 as our alternative suggestion |
Numerous arguments can be adduced supporting the thesis that the source version (with g
1 as a melodic note) contains possibly no mistake:
- the minor seventh subdominant does not require a resolution of g1 to f1, as it is the prime that is altered.
- the chord in bar 209 and following.
- the recapitulation returns to g a few times, to break it afterwards (bars 209 and 213, 228), yet eventually the piece ends with a cadenza using the minor subdominant;
- in the last full cadenza, the melodic progression g2-b2-a2-b2 is used, as in the discussed place;
- proofreading of FE3 and FE4 in this and the following bar;
The arguments for an oversight of the natural:
- the 2nd half of bar 255 (the 1st bar of the 5th variation). In an identical chord (written in B minor, hence in a five-flat key signature), none of the five g/g notes in the piano part includes a natural, in the preserved manuscript of the score it is also absent in the part of the orchestra. However, a multiple oversight of naturals by Chopin is unquestionable, as in the part of the orchestra the g note (in the notation) is performed by the 2nd violin
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions
issues: Omissions to cancel alteration, Errors of A
notation: Pitch