Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Chopin op. 4 ?

Rosen's evidence derives from the French and English first editions (not a "Warsaw autograph," which does not exist; no autograph of the complete Sonata exists).

I invite you all to look here:

Chopin First Editions Online

Make your way to op. 35, and look at the first pages of the French and English editions. (The site doesn't let me link you directly to the pages, so you'll have to do this yourself. Even if you get lost, you'll have fun: Chopin first editions!)

Imagine yourself a pianist in London or Paris in the 1840s, taking the exposition repeat. You look at the first page. No double bar, no repeat dots under "Doppio movimento". Just a regular, single barline. Presumably many (most? all?) pianists would go back to the start of the movement, as the default location for the beginning of a repeat in the absence of a double bar with repeat dots earlier.

(There's good reason to suppose that the French and English editions reflect the reading of the now-lost autograph. The German edition does have the double bar and repeat dots at the "doppio movimento," but this reflects a manuscript in the hand of a copyist [probably Adolf Gutmann] - and importantly, that manuscript just has the double bars. So the repeat dots were added by the German publisher, and one might suppose that Gutmann added the double bar, to reflect the tempo change - but maybe not the location of the beginning of the repeat.)

So the textual evidence for the repeat going back to the Grave seems pretty clear. Rosen wasn't just going on "feeling."

All that said, if a pianist doesn't believe in the musical sense of the repeat going back to the "Grave," I'd much prefer to hear her or him go to the "doppio movimento" (or just skip it all together): I want to be convinced by a performance, not hear simple allegiance to a text.

Jeff Kallberg

Some great info! Thanks! Also notice there is no One Octave Lower notation on the B-flat octave in the third-to-last measure of the third movement.

As the Chopin National Edition mentions, Chopin's piano didn't have that note. Its bottom note was a C, and he uses that note in the development. Like Mozart, he used the resources of the instrument he was writing for, and 88 keys was not yet the universal standard.

Aha! Much like now we can use the Bosendorfer Imperial to play those bits in Scarbo.

But I'd leave the Mozart and Beethoven alone. I think they're better with the adjustments that the composers were sort of forced into.

Thank you, Dr. Jeff!

It's great whenever you can join us on anything, even though it puts a little damper on those of us who just fly by the seat of our pants.

Mark C: Musicologist coming along and spoiling everyone's fun . . . the story of my life!

Didyougetthathing:

Here's a YouTube (Avdeeva from the last Chopin competition) that takes the repeat back to the Grave:

Avdeeva Chopin op 35 first mvt repeat

Jeff Kallberg

Thank you, Dr. Jeff!

It's great whenever you can join us on anything, even though it puts a little damper on those of us who just fly by the seat of our pants.

So, Oshry didn't faithfully represent Rosen's view; he made it seem like Rosen was just flying by the seat of his pants!

As best I can imagine what I'd think if I were looking from scratch at the French or English edition -- i.e. not knowing the piece, never having heard it, etc. -- well, I better start by saying it's impossible for me to imagine it with much confidence. In line with what Bennevis said, if we're used to it a certain way, we're unavoidably biased -- and I think it isn't just people "of a certain age" but probably most people altogether who've become familiar with the piece, because I think it continues to be played mostly in the 'traditional' way.

Anyway, as best I can imagine what I'd think.....I really think I would have felt this was a bit of a mystery, and that maybe the notation on the page was incomplete, because of how going back to the very beginning breaks the momentum -- not unlike taking the repeat in the 1st mvt of Opus 58 -- and because I think the harmonic progression wouldn't have worked well to my ear. It wouldn't have been a unique example of something seeming to be incomplete on a Chopin page; the main example that leaps to mind is that little mazurka in C from Opus 7 with no ending.

I hope I would have wondered if the repeat was supposed to go back to the Doppio movimento. If not, I think I would have wondered if Chopin just didn't mean the repeat seriously, as per what Argerichfan said about Opus 58 and with which I agree.

I think there is something of a double standard here, in that you question Rosen on the basis of interjecting his own opinion and feelings in the matter (and by the way, if you agreed, would you care?) and then interject your own opinion in order to throw things into question again....

....You have this habit of questioning Chopin. Why do you think that the rules of notation, convention, etc. don't apply to him the same way they do to Brahms or Mendelssohn? Chopin composed just as carefully as them and, in some ways, with an even greater attention to detail. Yet there is this subset of musicology that is fond of twisting his instructions in some unnatural way because they can't make sense of them. Why? If you follow the score the results are fantastic....

Here's a YouTube (Avdeeva from the last Chopin competition) that takes the repeat back to the Grave:

Avdeeva Chopin op 35 first mvt repeat

Jeff Kallberg

Thanks for the link. I don't think it's that jarring going back to the Grave. And now, looking at the manuscripts and such, it is becoming more clear that perhaps the repeat should be from bar 1. However, since this 'error' has been played for so many decades, and since I am used to it repeating from the Doppio Movimento, I don't think I'll ever prefer it the proper way.

....I always thought it was strange that the sonata had no recapitulation....

Isn't musicology fun?

Well Mark, Jeffrey pretty much has us here....