|
b. 224
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
The notation of the harmonic legato (holding elements of chords with fingers), very detailed in A, was reproduced in the editions inaccurately. A fragment of the stem combining the notes of the a-c1 third was not included and the stem extending the first f1 was overlooked. As far as the mentioned third is concerned, the notation of A may be theoretically interpreted twofold: with a c1 crotchet or with an a-c1 crotchet. In this context, it is, however, clear that the a bass note is also to be extended. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE |
|||||
|
b. 224
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals |
|||||
|
b. 224
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
The missing slur in the majority of the editions is certainly a result of inaccuracy of the engraver of GE1. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions |
|||||
|
b. 224
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
In FE (→EE), there is a (cautionary?) category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: GE revisions , Cautionary accidentals |
|||||
|
b. 224
|
composition: Op. 22, Polonaise
..
In the main text we suggest adding an accent at the beginning of this bar. The accent is present in all three repetitions of this bar (in b. 228, 244 and 248), and, according to us, it is the composer's inadvertence or a mistake of the engraver of FE that are the most likely reasons for the absence of an accent in the discussed bar. category imprint: Editorial revisions |
before the last quaver, overlooked in 
before the 5th quaver. The unnecessary mark was removed in 
