Slurs
|
b. 43-44
|
composition: Op. 38, Ballade in F major
..
Despite the distinctly separate slurs in A, both FE and EE have a continuous slur here, possibly under the influence of the R.H. slur. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , FE revisions |
|||||||||||
|
b. 46
|
composition: Op. 38, Ballade in F major category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GC |
|||||||||||
|
b. 46
|
composition: Op. 38, Ballade in F major
..
The slurs encompassing each of the groups of small quavers are written in A under the notes. This might have resulted in them being omitted in GC (→GE) and FE. However, EE reproduced the slurs over the beams what made possible to avoid clashes with the ties to particular notes of the broken chord. This more readable notation is given in the main text. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors of GC |
|||||||||||
|
b. 47-50
|
composition: Op. 38, Ballade in F major
..
EE overlooks all slurs in this four-bar section, in both the R.H. and L.H. parts. In GC there are no slurs in the L.H. part in bars 47-49, which is probably a result of an oversight too. In GE the version of GC was completed with a slur in bar 48, probably after bar 50. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in EE , GE revisions , Errors of GC |
|||||||||||
|
b. 51-52
|
composition: Op. 38, Ballade in F major
..
The separate R.H. slurs in these bars result most likely from a misunderstanding of the notation in A by the engraver of FE. Bar 52 starts a new line in A, and the beginning of slur clearly indicates a continuation. However, the slur in bar 51 extends only slightly beyond the bar line what might have mislead the engraver. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Errors in EE , Inaccurate slurs in A , Uncertain slur continuation |
