|
b. 382-383
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
The missing slur for the L.H. is most probably an oversight of the engraver of FE. After all, it cannot be excluded that, looking at A, he regarded the L.H. slur as the beginning of the R.H. slur, which can be indicated by the original range of the R.H. slur in FE. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE |
||||||||
|
b. 383-384
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
It is hard to consider a longer mark in GE as an accurate copy of the GC notation (in any case, in bars 41-42 the same notation was read more accurately), while a long accent present in EE may exemplify Chopin's intentions. In the main text we present a version based on two consistent sources, GC and FE that most probably originated from the two autographs. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE |
||||||||
|
b. 383-384
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
Only in EE there is a pedal up mark at the end of b. 384, this may have been an editorial revision. In FE there are no pedal markings in these bars, which may have been the engraver's omission as there is category imprint: Differences between sources issues: No pedal release mark |
||||||||
|
b. 383
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
Same as in analogous bar 39, in the main text we omit the cautionary flats before d category imprint: Editorial revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 383-384
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major
..
In FE (→GE), there is no ending of the slur in a new line. It is one of the frequent mistakes of first editions. The continuation of the slur was added by the reviser of EE. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Source & stylistic information issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , Uncertain slur continuation , Errors repeated in GE |
in 
in a corresponding bar 
1(2) present in the sources.