Issues : Terzverschreibung error
|
b. 330
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
The version of FE is almost certainly erroneous (in that edition a number of Terzverschreibung mistakes was committed). The error was corrected in EE. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Terzverschreibung error |
|||||
|
b. 330
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
In GE3 two Terzverschreibung mistakes were committed in this bar – g1 instead of e1 on the 2nd semiquaver in the bar, and C instead of E on the 2nd L.H. quaver. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , Terzverschreibung error |
|||||
|
b. 345
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
According to us, due to the absence of traces of corrections performed in print, a possible Chopinesque proofreading of FE (→EE) is less likely than a mistake of the engraver in this case. Therefore, in the main text we give the undoubtedly authentic version of A (→GE). However, from the musical point of view, the version with g1 is certainly not inferior to it. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Terzverschreibung error , Authentic corrections of FE |
|||||
|
b. 356
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
The version of GE1 (→FE1) is almost certainly a Terzverschreibung error, which was confirmed by the Chopinesque proofreading of FE2 (→EE) restoring the version of A. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , Terzverschreibung error , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE , Errors repeated in FE |
|||||
|
b. 359
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
The version of GE is most probably a Terzverschreibung error – cf. similar bar 367. A mistake can be provoked by both f category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in GE , Terzverschreibung error |
in 
in 
before that note in