This source evaluation has, of course, problems, for also “final” changes made by Chopin in F F have to be documented somehow. So, although C does not represent the final version, it is the “best” source and was consequently the main source for my edition. It nevertheless shows an earlier and “worse” text state than C. I must therefore draw the following conclusions: F F is in fact the final definitive edition, thus the source corrected last by Chopin.
Chopin did very carefully correct the copy C, on the other hand. Much is incompletely notated (dynamics are often lacking), and everything suggests that Chopin wanted to add these things then in the galley proofs for F F (which was done only to a very limited extent). What can’t be seen from this schematic presentation are the following observations: Autograph A exhibits many signs that Chopin was still not entirely “finished” with the notation. This interrelationship amongst sources can best be captured in a stemma: Before the French edition appeared, however, Chopin read two sets of galley proofs the state of the text after the 1 st proofreading became the model for the English first edition (F E). The autograph was used as engraver’s model for the French first edition (F F), the copy, for the German first edition (F G). No autograph is extant for the b-minor Scherzo, whereas for the 2 nd Scherzo we have both an autograph (A) as well as also a copy (C), checked through by Chopin. The source material, or so at least it is my impression, gets a bit more complicated with every scherzo.
#Richter chopin scherzo 2 update
So, it makes sense to update my report from the Chopin workshop and to highlight a few problems in these editions. 39, are just now appearing in my new edition. In the meantime, casually expressed, another 2 Scherzi later, 2 Scherzi more mature – and clearly even more confused, alas. In my blog post of 21 March 2016, I lamented the existing “confusion” concerning the tied notes in Chopin’s 1 st Scherzo.