Chopin, Sonata No. 3, Op. 58, Largo notation

[Don Phillip Gibson]

I'm working on Chopin's Sonata No. 3, Op. 58, playing it from Dover's
republication of the Paderewski/G. Schirmer edition. Editor is Carl
Mikuli, a student and teaching assistant of Chopin's. He has written
an interesting foreward, but it does not spell out precisely what
markings are his and which are Chopin's.

The Largo movement uses a notation convention that is unfamiliar and
confusing to me.

The double bar sostenuto E major section begins at measure 29. In
measure 31 the left hand has a three-note chord spanning a tenth,
measure 32 has a three-note chord spanning a twelfth. Each of those
chords has a vertical square bracket in front of it.

Measures 47 and 48 have exactly the same notes, this time with rounded
vertical marks, sort of like a slur standing up, preceding instead of
the square brackets.

If I were seeing just the square bracket or just the upright slur, I'd
think the composer or editor was just suggesting to roll the notes.
But having both the bracket and the upright slur makes me wonder if
something else is intended. Or is this just sloppy editing?

I have not looked at any other editions, and do not have such quickly
available to me.

Any suggestions, kind people?

Don Phillip Gibson

[gregpresley]

In the Padarewski edition, all of these left hand chords are given as rolls,
with the standard wavy line notation, without any comment in the editor's
notes at the beginning. I also have the Dover edition and looked at the
Mikuli markings which are as you described. Often, in Schumann's music and
elsewhere, the bracket is given to indicate a jump, with two of the notes
sounded together and one by itself - the jump can be from a single note to a
two-note group, or from a two-note group to a single note. But now I'm used
to the roll, because I learned the piece out of the padarewski edition.

Post by Don Phillip Gibson
I'm working on Chopin's Sonata No. 3, Op. 58, playing it from Dover's
republication of the Paderewski/G. Schirmer edition. Editor is Carl
Mikuli, a student and teaching assistant of Chopin's. He has written
an interesting foreward, but it does not spell out precisely what
markings are his and which are Chopin's.
The Largo movement uses a notation convention that is unfamiliar and
confusing to me.
The double bar sostenuto E major section begins at measure 29. In
measure 31 the left hand has a three-note chord spanning a tenth,
measure 32 has a three-note chord spanning a twelfth. Each of those
chords has a vertical square bracket in front of it.
Measures 47 and 48 have exactly the same notes, this time with rounded
vertical marks, sort of like a slur standing up, preceding instead of
the square brackets.
If I were seeing just the square bracket or just the upright slur, I'd
think the composer or editor was just suggesting to roll the notes.
But having both the bracket and the upright slur makes me wonder if
something else is intended. Or is this just sloppy editing?
I have not looked at any other editions, and do not have such quickly
available to me.
Any suggestions, kind people?
Don Phillip Gibson

[dwight]

Post by Don Phillip Gibson
I'm working on Chopin's Sonata No. 3, Op. 58, playing it from Dover's
republication of the Paderewski/G. Schirmer edition. Editor is Carl
Mikuli, a student and teaching assistant of Chopin's. He has written
an interesting foreward, but it does not spell out precisely what
markings are his and which are Chopin's.
The Largo movement uses a notation convention that is unfamiliar and
confusing to me.
The double bar sostenuto E major section begins at measure 29. In
measure 31 the left hand has a three-note chord spanning a tenth,
measure 32 has a three-note chord spanning a twelfth. Each of those
chords has a vertical square bracket in front of it.

First, the Mikuli (Dover) edition is not the Paderewski. What you describe
appears in the edition used on our CD Sheet Music disc. I asked our editor
about the brackets, and he feels that this indicates that the chord is NOT
arpeggiated. Also, that the second bracket, more of a slur, is just sloppy
editing.

The Paderewski edition, itself, plainly indicates that the L.H. chord is
arpeggiated. No vertical brackets appear next to the wavy line.

In Jan Ekier's new National Edition, he points out: "L.H. The note e in the
middle of the bar is more easily played in the R.H., together with e'." In
other words, roll the lower two notes and then play the e octave on the
beat.

Post by Don Phillip Gibson
Measures 47 and 48 have exactly the same notes, this time with rounded
vertical marks, sort of like a slur standing up, preceding instead of
the square brackets.
If I were seeing just the square bracket or just the upright slur, I'd
think the composer or editor was just suggesting to roll the notes.
But having both the bracket and the upright slur makes me wonder if
something else is intended. Or is this just sloppy editing?
I have not looked at any other editions, and do not have such quickly
available to me.

That's why I love working here. I've got a warehouse full of various
editions to look at!

dwight
theodore presser co

[Don Phillip Gibson]

Thank you Dwight, Greg, David, and Dave. Each of you responded,
either privately or in r.m.m.p., to my query about the square bracket
notation. All your replies were thought provoking and carefully
offered.

Several things are now more apparent.

The Dover publication is not a “Paderewski/G. Schirmer” reprint. I
bought it from sheetmusicplus.com, where it is described as a
Paderewski reprint. But doverpublications.com describes it as a G.
Schirmer reprint. I joined the two descriptions, but sheetmusicplus
is clearly wrong in their attribution. I’ll refer to Dover’s G.
Schirmer below as “Mikuli” after its editor.

The real Paderewski edition uses wavy vertical line “roll” notation.
There are no brackets.

Dwight and Dave both feel that Mikuli’s square bracket indicates the
chord is NOT to be arpeggiated. I agree.

Dwight asked a Theodore Presser editor about Mikuli’s second vertical
slur notation and got a “sloppy editing” vote. I agree.

Dwight says that Jan Ekier’s new National Edition says, “L.H. The note
e in the middle of the bar is more easily played in the R.H. together
with e’.” Then Dwight suggests, “...roll the two lower notes and play
the e octave on the beat. “ I agree with Ekier’s suggestion, but
doing that, I see no reason to roll anything.

I can reach the tenths easily, and can play the twelfths easily by
taking the top note with R.H. So that’s my solution—for today at
least. Thank you all for your valuable input.

Don Phillip Gibson

[f***@gmail.com]

anyone can explain me bar 59 of the same Largo ?
in Henle Urtext edition , in Breitkopf & Hartel Leipzig first edition, and in the manuscript, the left hand in bar 59 has only a bichord of semibreve while Mikuli edition has 4 chromes in the second half of the measure.

Pollini's and Blechacz's executions reflect Mikuli edition.