|
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 |
|||||
|
b. 224
|
composition: Op. 22, Polonaise
..
In the main text we add staccato dots under the last two quavers after analogous b. 228 and 248. There is a similar situation in b. 244. category imprint: Editorial revisions |
|||||
|
b. 224
|
composition: Op. 22, Polonaise
..
EE1 is lacking in the cautionary flats before a category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , Cautionary accidentals , Authentic corrections of FE |
|||||
|
b. 224-227
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
In the main text we give the slurring of GE, in which the slurs are separated with rests in b. 224 and 226. Although one can often encounter slurs over rests in Chopin's output – cf., e.g. b. 217 or 240 – in this case it is much more likely that the continuous slur encompassing b. 220-227 in FE resulted from misinterpretation of the slurs of the handwritten basis (perhaps inaccurate or ambiguous). It particularly concerns b. 224 – cf. analogous b. 165 – in which the melody, not to mention the L.H. part, moves on to a higher register (from f category imprint: Differences between sources |
before the 5th quaver. The unnecessary mark was removed in 
1 in the L.H. crotchet chord and before b
before a
1-e2 in b. 220-224 to f