b. 72-76
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
In the main text we add the indication cresc. added by Chopin in FC along with the dashes marking its range between b. 72 and b. 80. GE1 overlooked the dashes, but they were then added in GE2 (→GE3). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FC |
|||||||
b. 73-74
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
In A the short curved line under the bars is a tie of d2 in the bottom voice (cf., e.g. the tie in b. 77-78). However, the notation may be misleading, since the tie is placed over the notes, contrary to the rule according to which the ties of the bottom voice should be placed under the notes (however, Chopin would generally not follow that rule); moreover, the tie is placed on the bar line (in a way typical of Chopin), almost between the e2 crotchets. Consequently, it is the e2 in the top voice that is tied both in FC (→GE1) and FE (→EE). In analog. b. 205-206 the notation of A, although generally the same, is less misleading, as a result of which Fontana and the engraver of FE reproduced it correctly. GE2 introduced the correct text, most probably under the influence of the analogous place described above, yet GE3 returned to the erroneous version of FC (→GE1). category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Inaccuracies in A |
|||||||
b. 73
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
The only undoubtedly authentic notation is the notation of A (→FE). According to us, the use of a long grace note does not influence the performance: it is most likely that it is to be performed as a short, unaccented grace note; if we take into account the slur, we may assume that it is simply an arpeggio whose bottom note does not need to be held with hand. The notation of FC may also be authentic; Chopin could have changed therein the type of the grace note used (the missing slur is almost certainly an oversight). After adding the slur, the notation with a slashed quaver (used in GE2 (→GE3) and clear in terms of performance) may be considered a rightful alternative version. The change introduced in EE is probably arbitrary. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , Inaccuracies in FC |
|||||||
b. 74
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
A missing over a mordent is a typical inaccuracy of Chopin: he would put signs clarifying the performance of ornaments only occasionally, which, after all, was compliant with the then prevailing custom. The same applies to the subsequent repetitions of this phrase (bars 206 and 657). The sign was added in FESf. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Editorial revisions issues: Omission of current key accidentals , Last key signature sign |
|||||||
b. 77-98
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
In the main text we give the pedalling added by Chopin in FC (→GE). The same markings were added (most probably also by Chopin) also in FE (→EE); however, the pedalling as a whole in those editions is different due to the additional pedal changes in b. 83-84, 85-86, 91-92, 93-94, 99-100 & 101-102: see the note to b. 83-102. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Authentic corrections of FE , Authentic corrections of FC |