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

Pitch

b. 195

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

Chromatic scale in A (→FC→GE, →FE) & EE2 (→EE3)

Diatonic scale in EE1
..

The version of EE1 repeats the mistake of FE, which was corrected in the last phase of proofreading in FE. In EE2 (→EE3) the correct text was introduced probably on the basis of comparison with analogous b. 63 and 646.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Errors in FE , Authentic corrections of FE , Errors repeated in EE

b. 198

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

a in A (→FE→EE)

c1 in FC (→GE)
..

The version of A (→FE→EE) is the original one, probably left inadvertently, and changed by Chopin in FC (→GE).
A similar situation is to be found in b. 649.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Authentic corrections of FC

b. 209

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

..

A is missing the  raising g2 to g2. The patent inaccuracy was corrected both in FC (→GE) and FE (→EE). It is difficult to say conclusively who entered the  into FC, Chopin or Fontana. In turn, a diagonal cross, in pencil, visible in this place in A means that the missing mark was already noticed by the engraver of FE, as long as the mark comes from the time the Scherzo was published.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Omission of current key accidentals , Errors of A , FE revisions , Fontana's revisions

b. 213-214

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

No sign in A (→FE→EE)

 in FC (→GE1)

Shorter  in GE2 (→GE3)
..

In the main text we add the  mark entered by Chopin into FC (→GE1). In subsequent GE, like in analogous b. 81-82, the mark was arbitrarily moved and shortened.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FC

b. 240

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

b1-g2-b2 in A (→FC→GE1, →FE→EE)

b1-f2-b2 in GE2 (→GE3)
..

The version of the majority of the sources, the 3rd chord with g2, does not raise doubts as such. However, they arise when compared with analogous b. 108, in which, after the corrections performed in A, Chopin eventually wrote a chord featuring f2. Actually, the corrections probably concerned the issue of rhythm; however, they guarantee that the b1-f2-b2 chord does not contain a mistake and was intended by Chopin. What is more, had the corrections been performed simultaneously with the revision of the entire manuscript, this version would have been the last one written by Chopin. Taking into account the above observations as well as the fact that it seems highly unlikely that such an insignificant difference could have been intentionally left behind, we consider the version with f2 an equivalent variant. This is the only version that was introduced in GE2 (→GE3).
There is a similar situation in b. 691.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: GE revisions , Omitted correction of an analogous place