mUltimate Chopin

Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt I

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Inaccuracies in 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. 190-191

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

New slur in GC (literal reading) & FE (→EE)

Slur continued in GC (interpretation→GE)
..

Providing bar 191 with a separate slur can be an echo of the original slurring (cf., e.g., the slurs in bars 45-48). The notation of GC suggests that the slurs could have been combined by Chopin in [A], which was misunderstood in FE (→EE). 

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Inaccuracies in GC

b. 197

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

..

In GC (→GE) and FE there is no  raising f to f. The patent inaccuracy was corrected in EE, which, in spite of the fact that the base text to EE was corrected by Chopin, could have been performed by the reviser.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Inaccuracies in GC

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

b. 212-214

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

7 slurs in GC

6 slurs in FE (→EE) & GE2

3 slurs in GE1
..

These bars, as well as a few next ones, are a characteristic example of Gutmann's inaccuracy as a copyist. The slurs are drawn so inaccurately that the engraver of GE1 simply omitted a few of them, not knowing what to do with them. Our suggestion of their interpretation is only a certain idea of the actual notation. We do not try finding sense in this slurring – there is no doubt that Chopin's intention were regular, three-crotchet-long slurs, conveyed by FE (→EE) and correctly interpreted in GE2.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in GC