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
Notation
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

b. 344

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

Wedge in A (→FC,FE)

Dot in GE1 & EE

No mark in GE2 (→GE3)
..

The staccato mark in A, despite its smallness, is clearly prolonged (vertically). Both Fontana in FC and the engraver of FE regarded it as a wedge. GE1 and EE changed it to a dot, which can be considered acceptable, taking into account the fact that both passage E major sections feature only dots except for this place, including in analogous b. 438 & 446. GE2 (→GE3) did not include the mark, which could easily be considered an oversight if it were not for the dot in analogous  b. 446, which was also left out.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Errors in GE , EE inaccuracies , Wedges

b. 348-349

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

in A & GE2 (→GE3)

No sign in FC (→GE1) & FE (→EE)
..

The  hairpin, very clear in A, was overlooked both in FC (→GE1) and FE (→EE). Its absence in FC may be explained by a possibility that the mark was added in A later, yet its absence in FE must be an oversight. The hairpin was added in GE2 (→GE3) most probably by analogy with the remaining three similar places.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Errors of FC

b. 348-349

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

Tied third in A (→FE→EE) & GE

Repeated third in FC
..

The missing ties of the b-d1 third must be an oversight of the copyist, revised in GE.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Errors of FC

b. 348

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

Slur from f in A (→FE,FC→GE)

Slur from B in EE
..

The version of EE, which can be considered an interpretation – ignoring the musical sense – of the slur of A, written with panache, could have been repeated after FE, which, after all, was based on A. In the very FE the erroneous slur would have been corrected in the last phase of proofreading (although there are no visible traces of such a correction on the available photocopies of FE copies). In turn, the slur in GE1 – beginning from f in the previous bar – is completely erroneous. The engraver could have mistaken the bars, since they end with the same note (the mistake was corrected in subsequent GE).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , Errors in GE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE , Inaccuracies in FC

b. 348

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

  in A (→FE→EE) & GE2 (→GE3)

No markings in FC (→GE1)
..

In the main text we include the   markings written in A (→FE→EE). Their absence in FC (→GE1), in which the pedalling of the eight-bar section encompassing this bar (b. 346-357) was also written by Chopin, is, according to us, a result of the composer's inattention (cf. b. 448-459).
In GE2 (→GE3) the pedalling was added on the basis of a comparison with analogous bars.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Corrections in A , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FC