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


Slurs

b. 91-92

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

Slur from bar 91 in GC, FE (→EE) & GE2

Slur from bar 92 in GE1

..

The fact that the slur in GE1 begins later must be a mistake of the engraver; he omitted the part of the slur falling on b. 91, which ends the line. The error was corrected in GE2.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions

b. 93

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

No slur in GC (→GE)

Slur in FE (→EE)

..

There are no reasons to doubt the authenticity of the slur of FE (→EE), although it is not certain whether it was overlooked in GC or added in [A] already after the copy had been prepared.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors of GC

b. 93-94

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

Slur in GC, probable interpretation

Slur in FE (→EE)

No slur in GE

Probable slur in [A]

..

The suggested reconstruction is based on a joint consideration of the slurs in the L.H. in GC and FE. Both the copyist and the engraver of FE had in front of them the same Chopin's autograph and it is highly likely that each of them reproduced one part of the slur, which in [A] was divided due to the end of the page (line). It can be assumed that the engraver of FE1 overlooked only a short fragment of the slur in bar 93, whereas the copyist – the slurs in the next three bars. This kind of reasoning is also justified by the adopted interpretation of the unfinished slur of GC (overlooked in GE). According to us, the slur of FE can be considered to be equal, as Chopin could have accepted it in relation to the change of concept of accentuation – cf. bars 222-224.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

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

b. 94-97

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

No slurs in GC (→GE)

Slurs in FE (→EE)

..

In GC (→GE) the slurs were probably overlooked by the copyist.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors of GC

b. 96-97

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

Longer slur in GC & FE (→EE)

Shorter slur in GE

..

In b. 96, at the end of the line, the slur of GE1 suggests continuation; however, there is no ending thereof in b. 97. Therefore, we reproduce it – like in GE2 – as a slur reaching only the last chord in b. 96. In the main text we give the compliant and unequivocal notation of GC and FE (→EE).

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Uncertain slur continuation