|
b. 544
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
The missing staccato dot in FE and GE1 must be a result of the engravers' oversights (the engraver of GE1 can be excused, since it is difficult to identify the mark in FC). The accent added in GE2 (→GE3) by analogy with the next bars is an arbitrary revision. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Errors in GE , GE revisions |
||||||
|
b. 544-551
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
The fact of GE2 (→GE3) shortening the slurs results from a general assumption adopted by the revisers of GE2 according to which all similar motifs should be provided with slurs encompassing quavers only. The discussed bars, in which both manuscripts and the remaining editions contain clearly longer slurs, stand in flagrant contradiction with that conjecture. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |
||||||
|
b. 545-546
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
In EE the chords are not tied, which must be an error. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in EE |
||||||
|
b. 545
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
In the main text we add cautionary flats before the A category imprint: Editorial revisions |
||||||
|
b. 546-547
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
The slurs of FE (→EE), longer than in the vast majority of the remaining similar figures, are most probably inaccurate. Shortening the first of them in GE1 (→GE2) also seems to be an inaccuracy – the reviser would have certainly shortened both slurs, like it was performed in GE3. We introduce the latter also in the main text. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions |
-a
1 in 
