Issues : Errors in PE
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next »
b. 124
|
composition: WN 29, Waltz in E minor
..
The indication was added in PE2 (→PE3→PE4) probably as a correction of the oversight by the engraver of PE1 (→GE). According to us, however, it is more likely that the indication entered into [A] was , and not :
category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Errors in PE , |
||||||||
b. 124
|
composition: WN 29, Waltz in E minor
..
The wedges for the 1st crotchet were most probably overlooked by PE1 (→GE), which was rectified by adding them in PE2 (→PE3→PE4). Cf. the note on / below. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Wedges , Errors in PE , |
||||||||
b. 124
|
composition: WN 29, Waltz in E minor
..
The version of GE and our main text are two alternative ways of correcting the wrong version of PE, in which it is only a mark that is present in this bar, without the corresponding mark. category imprint: Editorial revisions issues: GE revisions , Errors in PE |
||||||||
b. 125
|
composition: WN 29, Waltz in E minor
..
In PE1 (→PE2) there is no lowering f2 to f2. The patent mistake was corrected in GE. A natural to this note was also added in PE3 (→PE4); however, it was placed on the wrong side of the note – right. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Errors resulting from corrections , GE revisions , Sign reversal , Errors in PE , |
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next »