mUltimate Chopin

Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Inaccuracies in A

b. 9-41

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

3 wedges in A

3 dots in FC

3 wedges & dot in FE (→EE)

4 dots in GE, our alternative suggestion

4 wedges suggested by the editors
..

It is unclear whether the staccato markings with which Chopin provided the R.H. chords in b. 9, 17 and 33 (the missing marking in bar 41 must be an oversight, since it is the first bar on a new page of A) should be interpreted as wedges or dots. The ambiguity is confirmed by the sources based directly on A: the copyist interpreted those markings as dots, whereas the engraver of FE – as wedges. According to us, there are more arguments in favour of wedges, which we thereby suggest in the main text. The dot added in FE in bar 41 may come from Chopin, yet in this case it is also unclear whether the engraver interpreted Chopin's proof entry correctly. An identical addition introduced in GE cannot be authentic.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE , Wedges , Inaccuracies in A

b. 73-74

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

Tied d2 in A & GE2

Tied e2 in FC (→GE1), FE (→EE) & GE3
..

In A the short curved line under the bars is a tie of d2 in the bottom voice (cf., e.g. the tie in b. 77-78). However, the notation may be misleading, since the tie is placed over the notes, contrary to the rule according to which the ties of the bottom voice should be placed under the notes (however, Chopin would generally not follow that rule); moreover, the tie is placed on the bar line (in a way typical of Chopin), almost between the e2 crotchets. Consequently, it is the e2 in the top voice that is tied both in FC (→GE1) and FE (→EE). In analog. b. 205-206 the notation of A, although generally the same, is less misleading, as a result of which Fontana and the engraver of FE reproduced it correctly. GE2 introduced the correct text, most probably under the influence of the analogous place described above, yet GE3 returned to the erroneous version of FC (→GE1).   

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Inaccuracies in A

b. 179-180

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

 in A (→FE)

No markings in FC (→GE)

   & L.H. slur in EE

   suggested by the editors
..

The missing  mark after , present in A (→FE) in b. 179, could be considered a common inaccuracy resulting from distraction caused by the transition into a new page of the manuscript. However, an identical situation is to be found in A in analogous b. 630; since both places are devoid of pedalling markings in FC (→GE), both  marks were probably added in A after FC had been finished. Therefore, Chopin could have considered the  marks to be clear enough while completing A. On the other hand, the  mark, added – probably by Chopin – in FE (→EE) at the end of b. 631, suggests that the decision was changed (or that the inaccurate notation, perhaps introduced in haste, was completed). Due to the above reason, in the main text we add a  mark also in b. 180. EE performed a far-reaching revision: apart from adding a , the slur placed by Chopin over the parts of both hands was doubled under the bottom stave. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Corrections in A , No pedal release mark , Errors of FC , Inaccuracies in A

b. 249-250

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

Slur to f in A

No slur in FC

Slur to d1 in FE (→EE) & GE
..

When interpreted literally, the slur of A encompasses only the quavers. A comparison with the analogous figures proves Chopin's inaccuracy, corrected already in FE (→EE). The missing slur in FC must be an oversight of the copyist, corrected already in GE1 (→GE2→GE3).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , GE revisions , FE revisions , Errors of FC , Inaccuracies in A

b. 295-297

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

R.H. slur from a in A (→FC→GE1, →FE→EE)

Slurs from b & d in GE2 (→GE3)

Slurs from a & c suggested by the editors
..

According to us, the majority of the sources led the slur up to b. 297 in order to clearly mark the fragment of A, heavily crossed out. A comparison with analogous b. 274, 376 & 397 proves that Chopin considered a slur reaching b. 296 to be enough, and this is the one we give in the main text. It was also the crossings-out that were probably the reason for the missing slur in the L.H., which we hence add. The differently led slurs of GE2 (→GE3), which repeated the erroneous slurs of GE1 from b. 274-275, cannot be justified, in terms of both sources and music.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: GE revisions , Inaccuracies in A