Issues : EE revisions
b. 142
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
FE has erroneously c as the last L.H. note. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE |
||||||||
b. 152-154
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
Just like in b. 20-22, in FC the slur was extended by Chopin. The doubled ties in EE are an arbitrary revision, quite frequently applied in that edition. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: EE revisions , Authentic corrections of FC |
||||||||
b. 179-180
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
The missing mark after , present in A (→FE) in b. 179, could be considered a common inaccuracy resulting from distraction caused by the transition into a new page of the manuscript. However, an identical situation is to be found in A in analogous b. 630; since both places are devoid of pedalling markings in FC (→GE), both marks were probably added in A after FC had been finished. Therefore, Chopin could have considered the marks to be clear enough while completing A. On the other hand, the mark, added – probably by Chopin – in FE (→EE) at the end of b. 631, suggests that the decision was changed (or that the inaccurate notation, perhaps introduced in haste, was completed). Due to the above reason, in the main text we add a mark also in b. 180. EE performed a far-reaching revision: apart from adding a , the slur placed by Chopin over the parts of both hands was doubled under the bottom stave. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Corrections in A , No pedal release mark , Errors of FC , Inaccuracies in A |
||||||||
b. 180-181
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
In spite of the lack of the ending of the slur in b. 181, which opens a new page in A, the clearly dragged ending of the slur in b. 180 leaves no doubt about Chopin's intention (there is a similar situation in analogous b. 631). However, it is not as obvious in FC, so in GE the slur was led only to the end of b. 180. The inaccurate notation of A was repeated unchanged in FE, whereas in EE the slur was clearly led to b. 181; moreover, an arbitrary analogous slur was added under the stave: see the note on pedalling in b. 179-180. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Inaccurate slurs in A , Uncertain slur continuation |
||||||||
b. 205
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
Like in b. 73, it is only the notation of A (→FC,FE) that is undoubtedly authentic. We consider the notation of GE acceptable too. The notation of EE is inauthentic, although most probably equivalent to the remaining ones. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |