b. 618
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
Like in bar 618, one can assume that the mark placed under a tied, hence non-played note, was placed inaccurately. We suggest two possible interpretations of the mark:
category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Long accents , Placement of markings , Scope of dynamic hairpins |
||||||
b. 619
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
For the main text we adopt the FE long accent. Chopin many times emphasised a falling minor semitone motif, e.g. in Polonaise E, Op. 22, b. 119. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents |
||||||
b. 619
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
Taking into account the fact that similar figures of accompaniment are provided with slurs in the entire section, the absence of slurs in the last two bars must be considered an inaccuracy. A slur in bar 619 was added already in EE. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions |
||||||
b. 619-620
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
In the main text, we adopt the enhanced notation, used in GE and EE. The notation of FE is probably earlier, since in the vast majority of similar bars it was changed by Chopin to the latter. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , GE revisions , Omitted correction of an analogous place |
||||||
b. 620
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
The GC slur extends over to the rest on the second beat of the bar. This was characteristic of a freestyle writing of slurs by Gutmann (and also quite often by Chopin). category imprint: Source & stylistic information issues: Inaccuracies in GC |