|
b. 476
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
Chopin hesitated about the pitch of the last quaver. It is already the crossings-out in A that prove that the decision was changed twice – Chopin started with g2, changed it to d2, to return to g2. GE features a g2, however, in the proofreading of FE (→EE), Chopin changed it again to d2. It is the latest version that we give in the main text; yet both versions may be considered to be equal. It is interesting that there are no traces of similar hesitations to be found in an analogous situation, as far as the sound is concerned, 4 bars earlier. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Corrections in A , Chopin's hesitations , Authentic corrections of FE |
|||||
|
b. 476-477
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
In A, Chopin wrote only two naturals in this place – before the 2nd quaver in bar 476 and before the bottom note of the 1st quaver in bar 477. The missing signs before the 1st octave in the L.H. in bar 476 are the only case in the entire fragment in which the first occurrence of a note in a bar was not marked correctly. It probably indicates that the part of the L.H. was written after the passages in the R.H., hence the first b Chopin encountered while writing was the 2nd quaver, written on the bottom stave. Considering that the category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Accidentals in different octaves , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals , Errors of A |
|||||
|
b. 476
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
In FE, there is no accidental before the 3rd semiquaver. This patent inaccuracy, repeated most probably after [A], was corrected in GE and EE. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions |
|||||
|
b. 476-477
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
The missing crescendo mark under the last of the three semiquaver sequences constituting the ascending progression must be considered an inaccuracy of notation, since there are no doubts that it must be performed analogously to the previous two. Due to this reason, in the main text we suggest adding a hairpin after most accurately marked bars 472-473. category imprint: Editorial revisions |
|||||
|
b. 476
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
It is difficult to indicate the reason for the omission of the accent both in FC (→GE) and FE (→EE). Chopin could have added it in A already after he completed FC, whereas the engraver of FE could have simply overlooked it. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Errors of FC |
is valid also for the topmost note in the L.H., all necessary naturals were added already in 
] suggested by the editors
