Ornaments
b. 73
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
The only undoubtedly authentic notation is the notation of A (→FE). According to us, the use of a long grace note does not influence the performance: it is most likely that it is to be performed as a short, unaccented grace note; if we take into account the slur, we may assume that it is simply an arpeggio whose bottom note does not need to be held with hand. The notation of FC may also be authentic; Chopin could have changed therein the type of the grace note used (the missing slur is almost certainly an oversight). After adding the slur, the notation with a slashed quaver (used in GE2 (→GE3) and clear in terms of performance) may be considered a rightful alternative version. The change introduced in EE is probably arbitrary. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , Inaccuracies in FC |
||||||||
b. 74
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
A missing over a mordent is a typical inaccuracy of Chopin: he would put signs clarifying the performance of ornaments only occasionally, which, after all, was compliant with the then prevailing custom. The same applies to the subsequent repetitions of this phrase (bars 206 and 657). The sign was added in FESf. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Editorial revisions issues: Omission of current key accidentals , Last key signature sign |
||||||||
b. 205
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
Like in b. 73, it is only the notation of A (→FC,FE) that is undoubtedly authentic. We consider the notation of GE acceptable too. The notation of EE is inauthentic, although most probably equivalent to the remaining ones. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |
||||||||
b. 206
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
The missing in FC (→GE1) could be an oversight of the copyist, corrected in GE2 (→GE3), probably on the basis of analogy with b. 74. The missing over the mordent must be Chopin's inaccuracy: see b. 74. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Editorial revisions issues: GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals , Last key signature sign , Errors of FC |
||||||||
b. 302
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
We keep the notation of the majority of the sources, in which the double grace note is written in quavers. However, in the face of A, one can ponder whether Chopin did not forget to add the top beam of the semiquaver beaming, since in analogous b. 404 all sources feature small semiquavers. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |