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
Ornaments
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

Ornaments

b. 73

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

Small crotchet with slur in A (→FE)

Acciaccatura without slur in FC (→GE1)

Small quaver with slur in EE

Acciaccatura with slur in GE2 (→GE3)
..

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

No  in most sources

in FESf

[] suggested by the editors
..

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

Small crotchet in A (→FC,FE)

Acciaccatura with slur in GE

Small quaver with slur in EE
..

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

 without  in A (→FE→EE) & GE2 (→GE3)

No  in FC (→GE1)

with [] suggested by the editors
..

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.
A similar situation is to be found in b. 657.

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

Small quavers in GE2 (→GE3)

Small semiquavers in GE2 (→GE3)
..

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