b. 347
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
In A, the flat restoring e is written with pencil; therefore, its authenticity is uncertain (see the characterization of A). There is no corresponding sign before the bottom note of this octave in A. The flats are present in all parts of Morch performing this line and in analogous bar 23. The editions feature the correct text. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Foreign hand additions in manuscripts |
||||||||
b. 347
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
It is unclear which mark Chopin meant at the beginning of the 2nd half of the bar. In FE, the mark resembles an accent (short or long), yet it cannot be ruled out that it was supposed to be a , although certainly not as long as in GE3. A natural performance contains both an accent and diminuendo, which is best conveyed in one mark by a long accent or a slightly different short diminuendo hairpin. A similar problem appears also in bars 390-391. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Long accents , GE revisions |
||||||||
b. 347-348
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
Wedges instead of dots over the octaves and the sequence of L.H. quavers played over the R.H. must have resulted from a revision by the engraver of GE1, who unified these marks in the entire finale of the Variations. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Wedges |
||||||||
b. 347
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
As in bar 343, the type of accents was arbitrarily changed by the engraver of EE. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
||||||||
b. 348
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
Lack of in EE is either an omission or echoes one of the earlier stages of the Scherzo notation. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in EE |