|
b. 347
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
In EE and GC there is no bass clef at the end of the bar. Given that both editions are the same, we may suspect Chopin to have made this mistake in [A1]. Since the chords of RH in b. 348 are notated on two staves, lack of the clef does not pose any problems for text interpretation (in EE b. 348 is printed as the new line of the text with the right clef at the beginning, which minimises the consequences of this omission). The clef was supplemented in GE. category imprint: Source & stylistic information issues: GE revisions , EE inaccuracies , Errors of GC |
|||||||||
|
b. 347
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
In A, the flat restoring e 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 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 |
is written with pencil; therefore, its authenticity is uncertain (see the 
in 
