|
b. 637-644
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
The stretto indication was most precisely written out in GC, where we know exactly the scope of the notated dashes. Neither EE nor GE shows it with scu precision. In FE there is no indication at all. However, we believe that the scope indicated in GC was not really based on Chopin's intention as it would be virtually impossible to perform crotchets in bars 643-644. Therefore, assuming the notation of GC is imprecise, we suggest limiting the scope of stretto only to bars 637-642. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GC |
|||||||||||
|
b. 637
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
In FE1 there is no ledger line above the octave and it can be mistakenly be read as E1-E. The error was corrected in FE2. In EE the octave was wriiten in short with a digit 8. category imprint: Source & stylistic information issues: Errors in FE , Abbreviated octaves' notation |
|||||||||||
|
b. 637
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
|||||||||||
|
b. 637-639
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
In both manuscripts, these bars are a literal repetition of b. 186-188 (they are not written out in full), and like there, staccato dots in b. 637 and 639 are reproduced only in GE1 and GE3. We do not include them into the main text in view of their possible deletion during the proofreading of FE (→EE). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE |
|||||||||||
|
b. 638-640
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
The missing accents is almost certainly an oversight of the engraver of FE (→EE1) – bar 638 opens a new line of text, which would often cause distraction and defects of various kind. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |
