mUltimate Chopin

Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt I

Text Compare Notes Sources Description
Select: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

Articulation, Accents, Hairpins

b. 165-166

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

 in bars 165-166 in GC & GE2

No sign in FE (→EE1)

 in bar 166 in GE1 & GE2
..

In the main text we include the two-bar  sign written in GC and repeated in GE2. GE1 printed only a half of the sign on a new page, which, in turn, was repeated in EE2. No sign in FE (→EE1) is probably a result of the engraver's inaccuracy. Cf. bar 161.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in GE , GE revisions

b. 174-175

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

 in bar 174 in GC (→GE)

 in bar 175 in FE (→EE1)

2  in EE2
..

A comparison with FE, which is also based on [A], suggests that the  hairpin in GC (→GE) was misplaced – cf. b. 171. The copyist's momentary distraction is also supported by the fact that the slur ends too early (see the next note). Two marks in EE2 probably result from a comparison with the version of GE.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Scope of dynamic hairpins , Errors of GC

b. 189-192

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

No marks in GC (→GE)

Two staccato dots in FE (→EE)

Four dots suggested by the editors
..

The staccato dots, present only in the 2nd and 4th bars of this four-bar section, is probably a result of an inaccuracy of Chopin or of the engraver. In the analogous phrase of the exposition (bars 61-64), the articulation is marked much more accurately, so it seems that Chopin wanted to mark all bass notes in the same manner. According to us, the presence of dots in FE (→EE) in bars 190 and 192 indicate that Chopin imagined all bass notes in the recapitulation to be performed staccato too.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GC

b. 197-199

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

No marks in the sources

Accents suggested by the editors
..

According to us, no accents in bars 197 and 199 can be considered to be an oversight of Chopin – see bars 185-188.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

b. 211-212

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

 in bar 211 in GC (→GE)

No sign in FE (→EE)

 in bar 212 suggested by the editors
..

The placing of the  sign (diminuendo/long accent) at the end of bar 211 in GC (→GE) is certainly a mistake – cf. bars 212-213, and an inaccurate slurring, e.g. in bars 212-214. We consider the omission of the sign in FE (→EE) to be an error as well. In the main text we shift the sign written in GC to the beginning of bar 212, accordingly with the analogous motives.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Errors in FE , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in GC