|
b. 5-6
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
The slur in GC (→GE), embracing the entire bar 5, is probably imprecise – cf. the slur of the upper voice and a similar situation in bars 13-14. This is probably due to misunderstanding the notation of the autograph (not very precise itself) by the copyist. In the main text we give the slur of FE. The notation of EE (no slur above the lower staff) may be regarded as the original revision of the slurring of that motif (similarly in bars 13-14). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GC |
||||||||||
|
b. 5
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
In the main text we give the long accent, as can be seen in EE and GC. The placement and type of accent in FE (a short one above the L.H. minim) may have resulted from difficulties with deciphering the graphics of the hand-written base text. GE has the accent taken from GC and another one, above the minim c in the L.H. This is certainly a revision, one of many of that type. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |
||||||||||
|
b. 5
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
Missing from GC is the category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Inaccuracies in GC |
||||||||||
|
b. 5-22
|
composition: Op. 45, Prelude in C♯ minor
..
The placement of category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||||
|
b. 5-7
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
Similarly as in bars 1-2, we consider the versions of JC and EF as a result of an erroneous reading of the autograph of the previous version of the Polonaise, [AI]. Cf. also the remark concerning bars 3-4. category imprint: Differences between sources |
lowering G
to G. The accidental was added in 
in 
