mUltimate Chopin

Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt I

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Authentic corrections of EE

b. 217

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

d1 in GC (→GE), FE3 (→FE4) & EE

No d1 in FE1 (→FE2)
..

No d1 notes in the 3rd and 4th chords in the R.H. is certainly a mistake of the engraver of FE1 (→FE2), corrected by Chopin in FE3 (→FE4) and the base text to EE.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Authentic corrections of FE , Authentic corrections of EE

b. 221-225

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

Slurs in GC

No slurs in FE

Slurs in EE

Slur in GE1

Slurs in GE2
..

The absence of the slurs in FE, unless it is a simple oversight, suggests that the slurs in GC could have been added by Chopin. They were reproduced inaccurately both in GE1 and in GE2. Most probably, the slurs added in EE are also authentic, following the line of the changes of notation, introduced gradually by Chopin here and in the analogous fragment of the exposition (see bars 93-97). We suggest the latter, as the latest and most accurate, in the main text.
(Double slurs, as the ones in the L.H. in bars 222 and 224, were used by Chopin, e.g., in the Concerto in F minor, Op. 21, 3rd mov., bars 473-480. However, one may have doubts whether the fact of doubling the signs was not an idea of the reviser of EE.)  

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of EE

b. 232-234

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

No indication in GC (→GE)

in bar 232 in FE

in bars 232-234 in EE
..

The version of FE is most probably accidental – the engraver forgot about the dashes in the new line of the text. The addition in EE may come from Chopin, although it cannot be excluded that according to Chopin, the crescendo was supposed to be led until  in bar 239.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of EE