Issues : Inaccuracies in FC
|
b. 42-43
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
Both Fontana and the engraver of EE considered the longer marks of A (→FE) to be an inaccuracy and replaced them with common, short accents. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , EE inaccuracies , Inaccuracies in FC |
||||||||||||||
|
b. 49-52
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
The range of the slur limited in FC (→GE1) to quavers only is an inaccuracy of the copyist. In GE2 (→GE3) the slur was extended after analog. b. 181-184. See also b. 57-58. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Inaccuracies in FC |
||||||||||||||
|
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. 118-124
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
In spite of the clear difference in the length of the accents in b. 118, 120, 122 and 124 visible in A, in the main text we give a unified notation with four short accents, which are more natural in these brilliant, virtuoso passages. At the same time, it is compliant with the notation of the principal source, i.e. FC, although it seems unlikely that Chopin could have interfered with the notation of the copy here. The absence of the last mark in FE (→EE) is an oversight, whereas the shorter first accent in EE – an inaccuracy or revision. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Long accents , Errors in FE , EE inaccuracies , Inaccuracies in FC |
||||||||||||||
|
b. 137-169
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
In the main text we give the staccato markings in b. 137, 145, 161 and 169 on the basis of the homogenous notation of FC. The alternating wedges and dots in A indicate Chopin's inaccuracy: the unquestionable wedge in b. 161, along with the notation of A in b. 5-37, make us consider the wedges to be probably intended. The omission of the markings in FE (→EE) must be a mistake, whereas the double dots in GE – a revision (there is no top dot in b. 169 in GE2, which is a patent oversight). category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Errors in GE , GE revisions , Wedges , Inaccuracies in FC |
