Issues : Sign reversal
b. 180
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
It is difficult to say whether the change in the direction of the dynamic hairpin under the second two-note motif was introduced intentionally by Chopin or the reviser of GE1, or whether it is the result of an engraver's mistake. The lack of visible traces of changes in the print rather indicates an adjustment or – what the editors believe is most likely – an error. The engraver could have made the quite common "mirror" error by simply inverting the sign (cf. e.g. Nocturne in D Op. 27 No. 2, b. 6), or perceived this and the previous sign to be a pair , very common in music in general, and in these Variations in particular. Therefore, we leave in the main text the only undoubtedly authentic version of A. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions , Sign reversal |
|||||||||
b. 265-267
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
The version of FE (→EE) is almost certainly erroneous:
category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Sign reversal , Partial corrections |
|||||||||
b. 265-266
|
composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor
..
According to us, the slurs combining e with f and e1 with f1 are a result of a mistake of the engraver of FE, who placed them to the left-hand side of the chord in b. 266, whereas they should be ties, placed to the right-hand side of the chord. It is supported by the following arguments:
category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Sign reversal , Partial corrections |
|||||||||
b. 265
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
The hairpin is written in A between the staves and begins after the 1st R.H. chord (in Af the bottom arm starts as early as at the beginning of the bar). In GE (→FE,EE) the mark was moved to over the R.H. part, which, in this case, does not significantly influence its meaning. The change was most probably forced by lack of space between the staves; it cannot come from Chopin. The slight change of range in GE1 (→GE2) – the beginning of the mark was moved slightly to the right – was intensified by all subsequent editions, while FESB additionally reversed the direction of the mark, which is a frequent mistake in the first editions of Chopin's pieces. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Placement of markings , Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions , EE inaccuracies , Sign reversal |
|||||||||
b. 286
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
In A the sign is bigger than the majority of long accents, so it having been reproduced in GE as a hairpin cannot be considered an inaccuracy. According to us, the context, however, definitely supports a long accent, which is in A in the corresponding bar of the exposition by the way (bar 138). The sign in FE (→EE) is an example of a frequently appearing mistake, consisting in reversing the direction of a sign – cf. e.g. the Etude in C minor, Op. 10 No. 12, bar 53. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Errors in FE , Sign reversal |