|
b. 377-378
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
Given the apparently inaccurate notation of sources we suggest a slur based on a corresponding phrasing in bars 117-118. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE inaccuracies , Inaccuracies in GC |
||||||||
|
b. 377-378
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major
..
Extending the range of the hairpin almost throughout the two bars is an arbitrary revision of EE. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 377
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
According to us, there is a strong likelihood that the version of the sources is erroneous. It is indicated by the dotted rhythm in the analogous phrase in bar 373 as well as in bars 381, 383 and 385. The analysis of the sources of the orchestral part also suggests a mistake in the notation of the rhythm of the L.H. part – see e.g. MFrorch. category imprint: Editorial revisions issues: Dotted or even rhythm |
||||||||
|
b. 377
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
In the main text, we suggest a likely reconstruction of the notation of [A]. However, it is also the sources' literal interpretation of the slur that could correspond to Chopin's intention. category imprint: Editorial revisions issues: Tenuto slurs |
||||||||
|
b. 377
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
Like in bar 373, we consider the missing dot prolonging f2 to be an inaccuracy of notation. Our view was shared already by the revisers of GE and EE. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions |
