|
b. 596-599
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
It is difficult to determine to what extent the slurs of FE (→EE,GE1→GE2) reproduce the notation of [A] – one can, e.g. imagine that the fact that the slurs coincide on the 1st octave in bar 598 could mean that Chopin wanted to merge them into one slur. What is more, it cannot be excluded that it was already the notation of [A] that contained certain inaccuracies, a vast number of which can be encountered in the preserved Chopinesque autographs, e.g. the missing slur in the ending of the phrase (bars 599-600) could have been related to the transition to a new line of text, which frequently resulted in overlooked endings of slurs. Due to this reason, in the main text we suggest one slur over the entire phrase after the analogous place in exposition (bars 245-249). The solution given in GE3 reveals a routine approach, where it was whole-bar slurs that were considered most natural. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 596
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
Just like in b. 13 and 145, in the main text we add cautionary flats. The addition was already introduced in GE2 (→GE3). category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: GE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 597-602
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
The earlier beginning of the category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Hairpins denoting continuation |
||||||||
|
b. 597
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
In the main text we adopt the exact GC (#→GE) notation. EE and FE may have resulted from inaccuracies in copying or engraving or may be a testimony to the many evolving stages of the authenticity of this bar's notation. category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||
|
b. 597
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
In the main text, we add cautionary naturals before the 1st octave. category imprint: Editorial revisions |
in 
