b. 601-626
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Authentic corrections of FC |
|||||
b. 605
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
The missing staccato mark in A (→FE→EE) seems to be an oversight of Chopin, since corresponding marks are present in the three remaining, analogous b. 22, 46 and 154. The dot in FC seems to have been added after the remaining signs (note and slur) had already been written. Due to very numerous unquestionably Chopinesque additions in FC, it is also here that we can assume Chopin's correction. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Authentic corrections of FC |
|||||
b. 605
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
Just like in analogous b. 154, the indication , instead of , must be a mistake of the engraver of GE1. The mistake was corrected in GE2 (→GE3). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions , fz – f |
|||||
b. 606-607
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
Just like in b. 23-24, in FE (→EE) this pair of bars was replaced with a double bar with a two-bar rest marked with the digit 2. In GE1 the bars were not combined, yet in each of them both rests were provided with the digits 1. In the main text we preserve the notation of A (→FC), restored also in GE2 (→GE3). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , FE revisions |
|||||
b. 613-614
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
In accordance with the analysis of the Chopinesque or in this and all 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 markings, regardless of their actual length, are to be interpreted as long accents. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: GE revisions |