|
b. 672-677
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
In the main text we give an almost six-bar category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||||
|
b. 675
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
The absence and change of the staccato mark in GE1 (→GE2) is probably a result of carelessness of the engraver. A dot for the R.H. was added in GE3. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Errors in GE , GE revisions , Wedges |
||||||||||
|
b. 676-677
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
The pedalling added by Chopin in FC (→GE1) in b. 225-226, of which the discussed bars are an exact repetition, is inaccurate, according to us: see the note concerning these bars. A corresponding change was introduced in GE2, yet GE3 returned to the notation of FC. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: GE revisions |
||||||||||
|
b. 677
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
The missing fingering digit in GE could be explained by it having been added by Chopin in the last proofreading of FE. However, the fact of having left a few mistakes, particularly the wrong note at the beginning of the bar, rather suggests that the composer did not address that bar in the last phase of work on the text of FE and that GE simply overlooked the digit. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in GE |
||||||||||
|
b. 678
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
According to Chopin, this bar is supposed to be a repetition of b. 227. Due to the reasons discussed in the note concerning that bar, in the main text we interpret the mark written there by Chopin as a long accent. A similar solution was adopted also in GE2 (→GE3). category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |
in 
