Issues : EE inaccuracies
|
b. 248
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major
category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , EE inaccuracies |
|||||||||||||
|
b. 249
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
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 |
|||||||||||||
|
b. 249-253
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt IV
..
Generally speaking, the long accents added in GE are justified – Chopin indicated such a performance in the two preceding four-bar sections, as well as in bars 40-55. He used long, short and vertical accents and category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , EE inaccuracies , |
|||||||||||||
|
b. 252-259
|
composition: Op. 43, Tarantella
..
In GE2 (→GE3>GE4) each beat of bars 252-259 is slurred in LH. In GE1 only the first slur is notated over the 252-253 bar line. In FE (→IE) there are only two slurs over the first and second beat of 258 i 259, and in EE only the last one was retained. In A and FC3 this part is not written out with notes in the LH part - the notes are replaced by repetition of bars. However in A the first slur in this part is notated, while there is no such slur in FC3. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , EE inaccuracies |
|||||||||||||
|
b. 252
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
According to us, all versions of the editions are a result of consecutively overlapping inaccuracies and misunderstandings. In GE the signs were related only to the notes on the bottom stave, which was then inaccurately reproduced in FE and EE. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , EE inaccuracies |
marks (in various configurations). Due to the above, although the very accenting results from the preceding phrases, it is difficult to say which marks would be used here and next to which chords, hence in the main text we neither include the 
