|
b. 190
|
composition: Op. 22, Polonaise
..
The penultimate R.H. semiquaver in EE is an a category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
||||||||||||||||
|
b. 190-191
|
composition: Op. 22, Polonaise
..
In the main text we omit the cautionary category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: GE revisions , Cautionary accidentals |
||||||||||||||||
|
b. 190-195
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
The difference between GE1 and FE in the number of bars featuring staccato markings for the L.H. crotchets does not influence the performance – in both cases the marks serve as a model, and the articulation is valid throughout the entire section until b. 197. To the main text we adopt the more accurate notation of GE1. The reduced number of dots in EE probably resulted from the engraver's inaccuracy, whereas the omission of the marks in GE2 is rather a revision (cf. b. 151-158). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |
||||||||||||||||
|
b. 190
|
composition: Op. 23, Ballade in G minor
..
We add a cautionary category imprint: Editorial revisions |
||||||||||||||||
|
b. 190-193
|
composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor
..
In A the dashes marking the range of accel. are written inaccurately – in bar 190, which ends a line, there is only one, at the beginning of the bar, yet in a new line, from bar 191, Chopin continues writing dashes to the beginning of bar 193, confirming that the accelerando is still valid. We give this interpretation of A in the main text. In the editions the dashes in bar 190 were supplemented, but in the next bars their versions differ significantly from the A notation, mainly in terms of assigning the dashes to accel. or dim. In A dim. is placed above the dashes, which means that they all concern accelerando. Meanwhile, in GE the range of accel. includes only just the 1st triplet in bar 191 – the following dashes already concern dim. and reach the end of bar 191 in GE1 (a mistake – in the new line the marks were overlooked, from bar 192), while in GE2 the end of bar 192 (inaccuracy). The disparity between both indications is even greater in FE (→EE), in which the dashes following accel. reach only the end of bar 190, while the dim. indication is prolonged with dashes to the very end of bar 193 (in EE the marks in bar 193, on a new page, were overlooked). The GE version must be a distortion of the A notation, while the EE version is an inaccurately reproduced FE notation. On the other hand, it is uncertain whether one can similarly drop the matter of the FE version, which theoretically could have resulted from Chopin's intervention, either to [FC] or while proofreading FE1. Practically speaking, the A and FE versions can be considered two ways of implementing accelerando combined with diminuendo – a longer (gentler?) accelerando, which is joined by diminuendo, or a shorter accelerando, which then flows into diminuendo. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Errors in EE , Errors in GE , GE revisions , Inaccuracies in A |
1. It is most probably an example of overzealousness of the reviser, who was supposed to detect the overlooked cancellations of alterations, and who did not realise that a1 at the beginning of the 2nd triplet is not an alteration, but a note proper of the reigning key (B
before b1 at the beginning of the 3rd beat of b. 190, and we add a 
before b
