mUltimate Chopin

(Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt II

Text Compare Notes Sources Description
Select: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

Articulation, Accents, Hairpins

b. 20

composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt II

Short accent in A (literal reading→GE→FE,EE,IE)

Long accent in A, contextual interpretation
..

The comparison with the A marks in analogous bar 18, 19 and 21 proves that the one in bar 20, although much shorter, is also to be interpreted as a long accent.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in A

b. 22

composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt II

Staccato dots in A

R.H. wedge in GE (→FE,EE,IE)
..

The dot in the L.H. part was most probably overlooked in GE (→FE,EE,IE), while the mark in the R.H. was adjusted to the wedges over the quavers ending the passages in this and the next bars.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Errors in GE , Wedges

b. 23

composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt II

 in A, literal reading

Long accent in A, contextual interpretation

No sign in GE (→FE,EE,IE)
..

Both the starting point of the mark in A, slightly before the A-a minim, and the fact that it intersects the minim's stem, clearly indicate that it is related to this minim and, consequently, that it is an accent. This is also supported by the correction visible in A – in the preceding bar Chopin removed the  hairpin under the L.H. part, which suggest a change of concept from a  following a  to an individual accent; at the same time, it explains its atypical length. Therefore, in the main text we reproduce the mark as a long accent. The literal interpretation can be considered an equal variant.
The absence of the mark in GE (→FE,EE,IE) is most probably the engraver's oversight.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Errors in GE

b. 24

composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt II

 &  in A

 & accent in GE (→FE,EE)

 &  in IE
..

Unlike in the previous two bars, the mark resembling an accent is written in A under the rest and before . Therefore, it is a short diminuendo hairpin, and this is how we reproduce this notation in the main text. In GE (→FE,EE) the mark was moved to the 3rd beat of the bar, as in the preceding bars. In IE it was reproduced inaccurately, achieving a version generally compliant with A (yet almost certainly accidentally).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE

b. 30

composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt II

2 staccato dots in A, contextual interpretation

2 wedges in A, possible interpretation

Staccato dot in GE (→FE,EE,IE)
..

In A it is unclear whether the two staccato marks are to be interpreted as dots or wedges. We assume that they are dots due to the clear dot in the preceding bar. This is how the second mark – the first one was omitted – was interpreted in GE (→FE,EE,IE).

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , Wedges