Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
b. 154
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
The second octave in this bar is provided in A with a staccato dot (due to smeared ink the mark became distorted, yet, according to us, there is no doubt that the person who wrote it meant a dot). That dot, however, was not reproduced in any of the sources based on A, neither in FC nor in FE (→EE). The reason could have been an oversight or an omission due to the inability to recognize the shape of the mark. GE added a dot most probably by analogy with b. 22 and 46. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , GE revisions , Errors of FC |
||||
b. 162-163
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
In accordance with the analysis of the Chopinesque or marks in this and analog. pairs of bars (see b. 6-7), in the main text we give the averaged, more or less one-bar hairpin of FE (→EE). According to us, all marks, regardless of their length, are supposed to be long accents. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions , EE inaccuracies |
||||
b. 178-180
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
An earlier start of the hairpin is most probably an inaccuracy: of the copyist in FC (→GE) and – independently – of the engraver in EE. Cf. analogous b. 629-631. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins , EE inaccuracies , Inaccuracies in FC |
||||
b. 185
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
The lack of a hairpin in FC (→GE) is most probably a copyist's oversight. Likewise in the analogous b. 636. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors of FC |
||||
b. 186-188
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
According to the editors, the staccato dots over the initial quavers in b. 186 and 188 may be an original version. It is indicated by the dots cancelled in FC in the analogous b. 54 and 56, and the absence of dots in FE (→EE), both here and in analogous b. 637 and 639, which points to their deletion during the proofreading of FE. Taking this into account we omit these dots in the main text. They were also omitted in GE2, presumably in line with the analogous b. 54 and 56. GE3 restored the FC version. See also b. 193-195. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE |