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. 579-580

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

2 staccato dots in A (→FC)

No marks in FE (→EE)

4 staccato dots in GE

3 staccato dots, our alternative suggestion
..

In the main text we preserve the version of A (→FC), since there are no indications that Chopin was removing dots in FE or adding them in GE. However, it is uncertain whether the missing dot in b. 580 was intentional, since the bar opens a new line of text, which would often contribute to various inaccuracies of notation.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Errors in FE , GE revisions

b. 581-582

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

No L.H. slur in A (→FC,FE→EE)

Slur under L.H. part in GE
..

Just like in the previous bars, an additional slur under the L.H. part is not necessary in this layout.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions

b. 588

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

..

In EE1 the bottom note of the L.H. crotchet is an erroneous A1. The mistake was initially also in FE, in which, however, it was corrected during the proofreading, perhaps by Chopin's orders. The mistake was also rectified in EE2 (→EE3).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

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

b. 588-620

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

2 times two & 2 times one dot in A

1 dot in FE (→EE)

4 times 2 dots in GE
..

Differently than in the two previous appearances of this theme (b. 5-37 and 137-169), in b. 588, 596, 612 and 620 there are no wedges at all in A. In turn, Chopin twice introduced separate marks for the L.H., which we consider to be determinant for the entire fragment. The use of double marking could have been related to the presence of longer, tied notes in the preceding motifs. The same unification was introduced in GE, whereas the notation of FC and FE (→EE) has to be regarded as inaccurate or erroneous.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Errors in FE , GE revisions , Wedges , Inaccuracies in FC

b. 589-590

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

Long accent in A (→FC,FE)

Short accent in GE1 & EE

in GE2 (→GE3)

 suggested by the editors
..

In accordance with the analysis of the Chopinesque  or  marks in this and analogous pairs of bars (see b. 6-7), in the main text we give an averaged, more or less one-bar  hairpin. According to us, all hairpins, regardless of their actual length, are to be interpreted as long accents.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions , EE inaccuracies