|
b. 280
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
The version of GE1 (→FE→EE) may be a result of Chopin's proofreading, although the lack of any traces of performing changes in this place in GE1 suggests that it could be a mistake of the engraver. Doubled E category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Authentic corrections of GE |
||||||
|
b. 280-281
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
In the main text we give the slurs of A (and GE2), certainly the only authentic ones – cf. the corresponding place in the exposition, with identical slurs in all sources. The slurs of GE1 are inaccurate here, whereas in FE (→EE) the first of them was omitted on top of that. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions |
||||||
|
b. 280
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
It seems to be unlikely that the missing e on the 3rd quaver could have been considered a mistake, which could have been suggested by a comparison with analogous bars. In FE, a corresponding note is absent also in the next bar, thus both bars refer to the shape of the accompaniment in the previous phrase (bars 272-279). Therefore, we consider the revisions of EE and GE3 to be unjustified. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |
||||||
|
b. 280-281
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions , Cautionary accidentals |
||||||
|
b. 280
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major
..
We omit a cautionary category imprint: Editorial revisions issues: Cautionary accidentals |
in 
before e