Issues : Uncertain notes on ledger lines
|
b. 23
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 4, Mazurka in B♭ minor
..
In GE1 (→FE→EE) the quaver c1 from A was misread as extended to a crotchet with an additional downward stem. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Uncertain notes on ledger lines |
|||||
|
b. 27-28
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I category imprint: Source & stylistic information issues: Uncertain notes on ledger lines |
|||||
|
b. 29
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 4, Mazurka in B♭ minor
..
The way in which both c1 notes were written in A was the reason why in GE (→FE→EE) they were interpreted as having additional downward crotchet stems. Moreover, at the beginning of the bar each of the notes of the seventh c1-b flat2 was written as belonging to a different voice. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Uncertain notes on ledger lines |
|||||
|
b. 31
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 4, Mazurka in B♭ minor
..
In A, the quaver c1 in this bar does not differ much from those from bars 23 and 29, yet the editions do not have an extra crotchet stem added here (except GE3). category imprint: Differences between sources; Source & stylistic information issues: GE revisions , Uncertain notes on ledger lines |
|||||
|
b. 31
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major
..
In FE, one can see traces of removal of the additional crotchet stem for the c1 note on the 2nd beat of the bar in the proofreading. The stem is most probably a mistake caused by the Chopinesque manner of writing notes on ledger lines – see the Mazurka in B category imprint: Source & stylistic information issues: Authentic corrections of FE , Uncertain notes on ledger lines |
Minor, Op. 24 No. 4,