b. 172-177
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt II
..
Both versions of the beginning of the slur may be authentic and they can be considered to be equal. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Authentic corrections of EE |
||||||||
b. 172
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt I
..
FE has no restoring f on the last crotchet. The mistake went unnoticed in consecutive corrections of FE, as well as in pupils' copies. However, it cannot be ruled out that the sign added in EE was indicated by the composer. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Authentic corrections of EE |
||||||||
b. 172
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
The distinct wedge over the 1st chord written in A was overlooked in GE1. When proofreading FE (→EE), Chopin restored the staccato sign, yet this time in the form of a dot. The version, being the latest, should be adopted in the main text, if it were not for doubts whether the sign written by Chopin was reproduced correctly. Errors in interpretation of Chopin wedges would be very frequent in first editions – cf. e.g. the Etude in E major, Op. 10 No. 11, bars 2-14 or 16-23. Therefore, we leave the wedge as the undoubtedly authentic and generally compliant with the nature of the Chopin proofreading, whose main objective was to restore the overlooked staccato sign. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE , Wedges |
||||||||
b. 172
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
In A there are no naturals raising d1(2) to d1(2) and b to b in the L.H. All three necessary signs were added already in GE1 (→FE→EE, →GE2). category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Accidentals in different octaves , GE revisions , Inaccuracies in A |
||||||||
b. 172
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
Leading crescendo to in bar 173 seems to be natural, hence in the main text we suggest adding dashes marking the range of this dynamic change. The absence of dashes in the editions is probably a result of an oversight of the engraver of GE1. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Inaccuracies in GE |