|
b. 101
|
composition: Op. 22, Polonaise
..
The slur of FE must be inaccurate, since there is no substantive reason for it not to encompass the entire passage. In turn, it is easy to misinterpret the beginning of the slur in this layout, if – which is highly likely – the beginning of the slur in [A] did not go beyond the top stave (cf., e.g. the autograph of the Etude in F Major, Op. 10 No. 8, b. 16, 29, 65 or the Concerto in F Minor, Op. 21, I mov., b. 235). Due to this reason, in the main text we include the extended slur of GE and EE. A similar inaccuracy, although less significant, can be suspected at the end of this slur. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions |
|||||||||||
|
b. 101
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
The lack of staccato dot in GE must be recognized as an oversight by the engraver or Chopin himself – GE has the mark in the analogous b. 9. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE |
|||||||||||
|
b. 101
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions |
|||||||||||
|
b. 101-102
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
The missing accents in GE1 must be an oversight by the engraver – the marks in the last line of this section were overlooked. It is also in the case of FE (→EE) that an oversight seems to be the most likely reason the accent in b. 102 was omitted. Therefore, in the main text we give an accent in b. 101 after FE and suggest adding it in b. 102. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |
|||||||||||
|
b. 101-105
|
composition: Op. 23, Ballade in G minor
..
In the main text, we remind you that the bottom notes of the melody led in octaves are to be performed by the left hand, as indicated by Chopin while proofreading FE in the previous bars. category imprint: Editorial revisions |
before f
1 featuring in 
