mUltimate Chopin

Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Scope of dynamic hairpins

b. 6-7

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

Long accent in A (→FC)

in FE (→EE)

Short accent in GE1

in GE2 (→GE3)
..

The analysis of the  or  markings, written by Chopin in A in these and analogous bars, leads to the conclusion that, despite significant differences in length (from a long accent to a two-bar hairpin), all of them most probably denote long accents. Due to that reason, in the main text we decided to unify them; we adopted a compromise  marking, which is more or less one-bar long. In the remaining sources Chopin did not interfere with the shape of those markings.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions

b. 14-15

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

in A (→FE) & GE

in FC & EE
..

In accordance with the analysis of the  or  marks written by Chopin in A in this and analogous pairs of bars (see b. 6-7), in the main text we give an averaged, more or less one-bar long hairpin featured in FC and EE. According to us, all marks, regardless of their length, should be interpreted as long accents.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins , EE inaccuracies , Inaccuracies in FC

b. 30-31

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

in A (literal reading→FE)

 in A (interpretation) & GE2 (→GE3)

Long accent in FC

Short accent in GE1

in EE
..

The interpretation of the notation of A is problematic here: b. 30 ends the line, and the  mark goes far beyond the bar line (in b. 31 there is already no mark). We assume that it is a one-and-a-half-bar mark, like in GE2 (→GE3). In the main text, in accordance with the analysis of the Chopinesque  or  marks in this and analog. pairs of bars (see b. 6-7), we give here an averaged, more or less one-bar hairpin of EE. According to us, all marks, regardless of their actual length, should be interpreted here as long accents.

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

issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions , Inaccuracies in FC

b. 71-72

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

No sign in A (→FE→EE)

in FC (→GE1)

in GE2 (→GE3)
..

The  hairpin was written into FC (→GE) by Chopin. An exact placement of the right-hand end of the mark is impossible due to the way Chopin wrote longer rhythmic values: in b. 72 the mark reaches the dotted minim in the bottom voice of the R.H., which is, however, written between the 2nd and 3rd quavers of the L.H. In the main text we place the end of the mark in a way that it does not go beyond the notes of the chord that opens the bar. In GE2 (→GE3) the mark was shortened even more by adjusting it to the size of the bar.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FC

b. 99-100

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

No sign in A (→FE→EE)

 in FC (→GE1)
..

In the main text we give the  hairpin written by Chopin in FC (→GE1). The two-bar mark in GE2 (→GE3) is a result of a standard revision adjusting hairpins (and also, e.g. slurs) to rhythmic structures, e.g. bars.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FC