b. 262
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
FE is lacking in a lowering d4 to d4. The inaccuracy, most probably repeated after [A], was corrected in the remaining editions. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals |
||||||||||
b. 262
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
There is no octave sign over the R.H. minim in A (→FE→EE1). The patent mistake (particularly after comparing it with b. 130) was corrected in FC (→GE), probably by Fontana's hand, as well as in EE2 (→EE3). category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors of A , Fontana's revisions , Errors repeated in FE , Errors repeated in EE |
||||||||||
b. 262
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
Omitting the second part of the tempo indication in GE2 could have seemed logical – Tempo I clearly defines the tempo of the returning main polonaise section of the piece. However, we must take into account the fact that at the beginning of the piece there are no indications concerning the tempo and nature of the composition, since it is obvious due to the title, i.e. Polonaise. In the discussed place, however, the title is not visible, which most probably prompted Chopin to specify the tempo. The sources contain various forms of the conventional Tempo I indication, which we standardise: We also correct the spelling mistake in the word "Pollacca" (double 'l') in FE. We reproduce the original versions in the graphic transcription (version "transcript"). See also General Editorial Principles, p. 9. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |
||||||||||
b. 262
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
The versions of Af and A, identical in terms of the way they sound, differ only in additions – an indication specifying the instrumental group in Af and a in A. As was the case with the previous such insert between bars 261-262, this replica was left out by GE (→FESB,EE1→EE2). In this case, however, it is difficult to indicate the probable cause of why this edition diverts from the basis. The fact that this insert was restored to FE in the initial version proves that Chopin hesitated whether to recall a chord being the basis of the first three beats of the bar at the expense of blurring the shape of the solo part. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Chopin's hesitations , Errors in GE , Accompaniment changes , Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||||||
b. 262-263
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
Wherever both hands move in parallel, Chopin very often considered markings written over the R.H. to be concerning both hands, particularly when both parts are written on one stave (cf., e.g. the Ballade in G minor, Op. 23, bars 1-5 and 251-256). Separate articulation markings for the L.H. in such contexts were one of the most frequently encountered editorial revisions. On the other hand, in the Variations Chopin himself wrote such markings a few times, e.g. at the beginning of Variation II (bars 135-137) and in the ending (bars 375-380). In this situation, being uncertain as to the authenticity of the dots and slur added in GE (→FE,EE), we do not include them in the main text. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |