mUltimate Chopin

Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

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. 209

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

No mark in A (→FC→GE1, →FE→EE)

Short accent in GE2 (→GE3)

Long accent suggested by the editors
..

In the main text we add a long accent after the authentic marks in analogous b. 69 & 77 and b. 201. The addition was also performed in GE2 (→GE3), in the form of a short accent.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: GE revisions , Omitted correction of an analogous place

b. 215-218

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

No signs in A (→FE→EE)

  in FC (→GE1)

  in GE2 (→GE3)
..

In the main text we reproduce the   hairpins after FC (→GE1), into which they were entered by Chopin. A precise interpretation of the range of the marks, particularly the first one, is hampered by an inaccurate synchronisation of the notation of the R.H. minims with the L.H. quavers. In GE2 (→GE3) both marks were extended so that they encompass two full bars, which does not result from Chopin's notation. 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FC

b. 221-226

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

No sign in A (→FE→EE)

 in FC (→GE1)

Longer  in GE2 (→GE3)
..

In the main text we give the almost six-bar  mark entered by Chopin into FC (→GE1). The subsequent GE slightly extended the hairpin, leading it to the end of b. 226.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FC

b. 227

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

No mark in A (→FE→EE)

 in FC (literal reading→GE1)

Short accent in GE2 (→GE3)

Long accent suggested by the editors
..

Interpretation of the  mark entered by Chopin into FC is problematic. Placed under the top stave, like all other dynamic hairpins in this theme, it seems to fill almost an entire bar. It was interpreted as such in GE1; it is that literal interpretation that we assume as the text of FC. However, a comparison with analogous b. 95 allows us to recognise another interpretation: in both bars Chopin most probably meant a long accent. The flamboyantly written top arm of the hairpin starts before the minim, to which this mark undoubtedly applies; it is typical of the notation of long accents, cf., e.g. the mark in the next bar or precisely in b. 95. The bottom, shorter arm, written last, may be considered more reliable in terms of the intended length of the sign, and it is as long as the unquestionable long accent in b. 228. Due to the above reason, in the main text we reproduce the mark as a long accent, like in b. 95. GE2 (→GE3) also unified this mark with b. 95.
There is a similar situation in b. 678. 

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FC

b. 230

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

No sign in A (FE→EE)

 in FC (→GE1)

 in GE2 (→GE3)
..

In the main text we give the  hairpin entered by Chopin into FC (→GE1). In subsequent GE the mark was arbitrarily shortened and moved to above the top stave. A similar situation can be found in b. 681.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Placement of markings , Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FC