Issues : EE inaccuracies

b. 239-240

composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor

in bar 239 in EE & GC (→GE)

8 in bars 239-240 in FE

Version of FE, unabbreviated notation 

..

In EE and GC (→GE) the lower note of the L.H. octave, D, is written – as – only in bar 239. That notation, when read literally, means the absence of both the tie and the tied note in bar 240. In FE, sustaining of the entire octave is written, also by means of an abbreviation, is a doubtless manner.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE inaccuracies , Inaccuracies in GC , Abbreviated octaves' notation

b. 241-242

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

..

In FE (→EE1EE2), the beginning of a slur continued in the next bar in a new line in the R.H. is missing. The mistake was corrected in GE. In turn, in EE3, the notation is ambiguous – the reviser added a separate slur for the triplet at the end of bar 241 and left the extended beginning of the slur in bar 242.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions , EE inaccuracies , Uncertain slur continuation , Errors repeated in EE

b. 244

composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt II

..

Overlooked naturals before the octaves in the L.H. – see bar 56.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals , EE inaccuracies , FE revisions

b. 248

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

Continuous slur in FE

New slur in GE & EE

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , EE inaccuracies

b. 249

composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I

g2 in A & FE (→EE)

g1 in GE

..

The erroneous pitch of the 2nd semiquaver in GE is a consequence of the imprecise notation of the end of the octave sign embracing the first two semiquavers in this bar in A (and the last four of the previous one). In GE1 the notation was reproduced too literally (erroneously), not taking into account both the graphical context and analogous figures in the next bars. The mistake was not repeated in FE (→EE), although the notation of EE is not entirely clear. In turn, the misunderstanding of Chopin's intention in GE2 is puzzling, in which the erroneous pitch of the discussed note was repeated, although the notation does not include an octave sign.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions , EE inaccuracies