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
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. 273-274

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

No sign in A (→FE→EE)

in FC (→GE)
..

In the main text we give the  hairpin entered by Chopin into FC (→GE). There is a similar situation in all analogous bars, i.e. b. 294-295, 375-376 & 396-397.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of FC

b. 294-295

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

No sign in A (→FE→EE) & GE1

 in FC, probable interpretation

in GE2 (→GE3)
..

In the main text we give the  hairpin entered by Chopin into FC (→GE). The exact range of the mark is questionable: it is written in b. 294, the last one in line, and clearly goes beyond the bar line; however, there is no continuation thereof in b. 295. We assume that it marks the same range as in analogous b. 375-376 & 396-397, in which the hairpins in FC were also added by Chopin. GE1 omitted the mark (the engraver could have been uncertain how to interpret the described notation), whereas GE2 (→GE3) provided the hairpin with a longer range, modelled after b. 273-274, which seems less justified, since:

  • the missing continuation of the mark in a new line suggests only a slight extension, and not a one-bar extension;
  • Chopin wrote a longer mark only one, whereas shorter – twice.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

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

b. 309

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

Staccato dot in A

No mark in FC (→GE) & FE (→EE)
..

The oversight of the staccato dot by the sources based directly on A is justified, to a certain extent, since the small sign is placed not only above the note, but also above the ending of the slur, so that one could have easily overlooked it. The fact that Chopin almost certainly meant a dot in this place is proven by analogous b. 411, in which a more distinct mark was noticed by the copyist.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Errors of FC

b. 311-333

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

3 long, 8 short accents in A

11 short accents in FC (→GE1) & FE (→EE)

12 short accents in GE2 (→GE3)
..

The accents, written in A in b. 311, 313 and analog., have almost certainly the same meaning despite the differences – generally minor ones – in length and shape. The majority of the marks are rather short; however, a few (b. 311, 317 & 333) may be considered long. Four undoubtedly long accents appear also in the repetition of this section (b. 417, 425, 433 & 435), which makes us place in the main text long accents only. At the same time, we add the accent in b. 331, overlooked by Chopin. We consider the version of GE2 (→GE3) with a set of short accents to be an alternative solution.

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

issues: Long accents

b. 332

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

Inverted long accent in A

Long accent in FC

in FE (→EE)

Short accent in GE
..

In the main text we give a long accent with which Chopin replaced in FC the original reversed accent, inaccurately reproduced as a  hairpin both in FC and FE (→EE). The short accent in GE is a typical inaccuracy related to Chopinesque long accents, which do not belong to the canon of generally applied indications.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Long accents , Authentic corrections of FC