Issues : Overextending slur
b. 10
|
composition: Op. 29, Impromptu in A♭ major
..
In A Chopin drew the end of the slur until the very end of the bar. We consider it an insignificant for the content graphic detail, as the tenuto of the d2 crotchet is indicated by the tie. category imprint: Source & stylistic information issues: Overextending slur |
|||||
b. 17-18
|
composition: Op. 29, Impromptu in A♭ major
..
The end of the slur in A is unclear. Despite the prolonged ending of the slur in bar 17, the slurs in A are clearly separated here. Taking into account the characteristic panache of this autograph, we interpret that slur according to the notation in the remaining sources. In FE the slur begins in bar 16. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness issues: Overextending slur |
|||||
b. 48-50
|
composition: Op. 29, Impromptu in A♭ major
..
The final fragment of the slur in A is written with panache, so the slur goes to bar 51. However, the shape of the sign clearly advocates for ending the slur in bar 50. In this situation the version of GE must be considered as erroneous. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Overextending slur , Errors in GE |
|||||
b. 86-87
|
composition: Op. 29, Impromptu in A♭ major
..
The slur in A in bar 86 (at the end of the great stave) clearly suggests a continuation, which is however not proved by the slur in the new line in bar 87. The separated slurs are compatible with the phrasing clearly inscribed in bars 3-6. The constant slur in GE1 is a consequence of unclear notation in A. It can be assumed that the manuscript sent for EE also had a similarly ambiguous notation. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Overextending slur |