Issues : Inaccuracies in FE
|
b. 438
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
As in the case of bar 431, the staccato dot is almost certainly an inaccuracy of notation, which was noticed already in EE and GE3. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , Wedges |
||||||||
|
b. 441-445
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
The omission of the dashes marking the range of crescendo is probably an inaccuracy of FE (→EE), although it cannot be excluded that it was in GE1 that they were initially omitted, to be added in the last phase of proofreading. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE |
||||||||
|
b. 442
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
In the sources, the c category imprint: Editorial revisions issues: Inaccuracies in FE |
||||||||
|
b. 446-448
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
In the main text we reproduce the elaborate notation of A. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE |
||||||||
|
b. 447-448
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
The inaccurate notation of FE does not clearly reveal whether it is a new slur that begins in bar 448 or whether it is a continuation of the previous one. Both interpretations may be considered justified, both from the source (graphic) and musical points of view. In the main text, we adopt separated slurs due to a four-note section beginning in bar 448. The missing slur in EE in bars 446-447 must be a mistake. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE |
2 note is wrongly assigned to the L.H. The mistake can be understood if we take into account the fact that on the last beat of bar 441 and the 1st quaver in bar 442 the parts of both hands are written together, on the top stave. In Chopin's autographs, division into voices may be unclear, e.g. due to middle notes written without stems. 
