Pianophilia

I forgot, I pre-scanned No. 3 (No. 4 unfortunately not - yet - available):
P.S. Disrespectfully Liszt called No. 2 the „Governess Scherzo“ and did not like to listen to it any longer, because every governess and „Higher daughter“ could play it.

Staples of the Romantic repertoire indeed, without which the piano wouldn't be the same! Somehow I missed your posting of the 1st scherzo, Alfred, but am enjoying it this morning. Comparing Kreutzer's edition to the Henle urtext is very enlightening --for instance check out the middle "molto piu lento" section where Kreutzer clearly highlights the inner voice leading while Henle shows us nothing AND, he also shows a top voice voice to bring out which I've been missing out on all these years. This section is truly magical.

And the 3rd Scherzo which I'm looking at closely for the first time in years....and my favorite, (along with No's 1, 2 & 4).

Very welcome, indeed, Alfred.

One writer on Chopin I read about years ago queried the
reason why he chose to start the 2nd. Scherzo the way he
did, on the tonic note rather than the first triplet.
If anyone has any views on this, I'd be very interested to
hear them - thank you. (Hopefully, nobody will consider me
a heretic for simply asking the question!)

Timtin wrote:One writer on Chopin I read about years ago queried the
reason why he chose to start the 2nd. Scherzo the way he
did, on the tonic note rather than the first triplet.
If anyone has any views on this, I'd be very interested to
hear them - thank you. (Hopefully, nobody will consider me
a heretic for simply asking the question!)

Interesting question. For me it is a sort of „preparatory“ note, creating stillness, attention and also a sort of tension for the following triplets. Without this half note (minim) many people would aurally „miss“ the first triplet and only in retrospect recognise that there might have been two triplets.
Cf. The first two notes of the Adagio from Beethoven's Sonata op.106. In this example the „preparatory function“ is still more evident, imho.

alfor wrote:

Timtin wrote:One writer on Chopin I read about years ago queried the
reason why he chose to start the 2nd. Scherzo the way he
did, on the tonic note rather than the first triplet.
If anyone has any views on this, I'd be very interested to
hear them - thank you. (Hopefully, nobody will consider me
a heretic for simply asking the question!)

Interesting question. For me it is a sort of „preparatory“ note, creating stillness, attention and also a sort of tension for the following triplets. Without this half note (minim) many people would aurally „miss“ the first triplet and only in retrospect recognise that there might have been two triplets.
Cf. The first two notes of the Adagio from Beethoven's Sonata op.106. In this example the „preparatory function“ is still more evident, imho.

But in op. 106 these two notes also are a (of course very short) "modulation" or let's say bridge, aren't they?

Your reason in Chopin op. 31 seems to be matching, yes. Intelligent thought of you.

Of course, those initial two notes in the Op.106 Adagio have been endlessly discussed in musicological circles for well over a century, the concept you put forth of "preparation" is well founded, but that it also applies to Chopin Op.31 is quite brilliant, Alfred.

Thank you gentlemen for your thoughts on this matter.
Personally, I quite like the idea of starting on the triplet,
since it is consistent with the following passages so to do.
Alternatively, perhaps Chopin could have had a more dramatic
beginning by having the tonic note a bar before the triplet bar.

Ferruccio wrote:...But in op. 106 these two notes also are a (of course very short) "modulation" or let's say bridge, aren't they?

I would agree! At least the word „bridge“ is suitable, imho.
A bridge from an unusual six-four chord ending in B flat major to a full F sharp minor chord!!!

alfor wrote:

Ferruccio wrote:...But in op. 106 these two notes also are a (of course very short) "modulation" or let's say bridge, aren't they?

I would agree! At least the word „bridge“ is suitable, imho.
A bridge from an unusual six-four chord ending to a full F sharp minor chord!!!

Alfor, wie du dir denken kannst, ist mir kein besseres Wort auf englisch eingefallen. Für mich ist das a (1. Note) wie ein Herunterrücken im Unisono von B-Dur aus, woraufhin dann ein gänzlich unerwarteter Weitergang passiert. Ich sehe im Übergang zwischen Sätzen der späten Sonaten immer ein Attacca, hier allerdings mit viel Ruhe.

Sorry for German here.