Issues : Errors in GE
|
b. 605
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
Just like in analogous b. 154, the indication category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions , fz – f |
||||||||||||||
|
b. 644
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
In A nad FC, this bar is a replica of b. 193, and likewise there we regard the shorter category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions |
||||||||||||||
|
b. 645
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
As in b. 637 and 639, we consider the staccato dot over b category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||||||||||
|
b. 731
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
The missing staccato dot in FE (→EE) and GE must be a result of oversights. We can excuse the engraver of GE, since the dot in FC looks like the ending of the octave's stem and is hard to perceive. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Errors in GE |
||||||||||||||
|
b. 756-760
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
The missing staccato dot in b. 756 in FC (→GE1) is most probably an oversight. It was also the dot in b. 760 that was overlooked in GE1, which, most probably, is also an oversight. By adding both dots, the reviser of GE2 correctly guessed Chopin's intention. In turn, the origin of the version of GE3 is puzzling, since there is no acceptable reason to remove the dot in b. 760. Consequently, it is either an erroneous revision or a misprint. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions , Errors of FC |
in 
in 
in 
2 a remnant of the original version, presumably removed during the proofreading of 
