|
b. 287
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
FE has an erroneous g as the last quaver in the L.H. In EE the mistake was corrected, most probably on the basis of comparison with analogous bar 139. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE |
||||||||
|
b. 287
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
The category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 287
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
According to us, the slurring of the sources, in which the legato articulation is marked in this and the next bar either explicitly, with a slur, or implicitly, with an additional quaver beam, does not have to be considered to be erroneous. However, it can be likely that the longer and complete slurs of analogous bars 303-304 express not a different but a later concept of Chopin. Due to this reason, in the discussed bar, we suggest an addition, whereas in bar 288, a modification of the slur, including this probably later slurring. category imprint: Editorial revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 287-288
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
The only digit written in FEH was given also by Fontana. Moreover, it is most probably a fingering envisaged by Chopin, since it is difficult to imagine another one here. However, it is not so obvious in the case of Fontana's indications at the beginning of bar t. 288 – g category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Annotations in FEH |
||||||||
|
b. 287
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
GE is missing the category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Omissions to cancel alteration , Authentic corrections of FE , Errors repeated in GE |
on 2nd quaver in 
2 may be as well performed with the 4th finger.
restoring a2 in the middle of the bar. It may mean that the accidental could have been added in the last proofreading of