b. 268-269
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
|||||
b. 268
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major
category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE |
|||||
b. 268-269
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
The reviser of GE2 assimilated the slurring over the b. 268-269 and 288-289 with the slurring of an analogous phrase in b. 369-370. It is difficult to find a justification for that decision: the unquestionable text was changed in three places (also in b. 390-391) on the basis of the fourth, questionable one (the notation of FC in b. 369-370 actually does not suggest a combination of the slurs). Therefore, it comes as no surprise that GE3 returned to the authentic version. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |
|||||
b. 268
|
composition: Op. 22, Polonaise
..
The second half of the bar is written in the sources even more carelessly than in b. 264. In FE (→GE1), there is no before a3 on the 4th quaver of the bar; the restoring a3 in the last chord is also missing. These accidentals were added in EE and GE2 (→GE3). Moreover, FE (→GE1,EE) are lacking in the flats restoring b1 and b in the last two L.H. quavers. The mistake was partially corrected – only on the 5th quaver of the bar – only in GE2 (→GE3). See also the preceding note. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Accidentals in different octaves , Omissions to cancel alteration , GE revisions , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in EE |
|||||
b. 268
|
composition: Op. 22, Polonaise
..
In the main text we suggest adding a wedge after analogous b. 264. category imprint: Editorial revisions |