|
b. 78
|
composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor
..
The deletions visible in A allow us to decipher the initial version of the R.H. part in this bar: category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information issues: Corrections in A , Deletions in A , Accompaniment changes , Main-line changes |
|||
|
b. 78-79
|
composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor
..
In the main text we give the A (→GE) version. The continuous FE slur could be considered – as in the entire theme – an equal variant. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Authentic corrections of FE |
|||
|
b. 79-80
|
composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor
..
The earlier pedal change in FE (→EE) must be a mistake by the engraver of FE or by the copyist in [FC]. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Errors repeated in EE |
|||
|
b. 79-80
|
composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor
..
In the main text we give the divided A (→GE) slurs. The continuous FE (→EE) slur may be considered an equal variant. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Authentic corrections of FE |
|||
|
b. 80
|
composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor
..
As in bar 78 and 82, moving the last bottom voice quaver between the 2nd and the 3rd notes of the triplet in the top voice was an arbitrary decision by the engraver of GE. In the discussed bar this version of notation – contrary to A – was also used in FE, which is, according to us, an arbitrary revision as well. In EE the Chopinesque notation was guessed probably on the basis of comparison with bar 78 and 82. Similarly, bar 167 and 169. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , GE revisions , FE revisions |
.
1 together with d