|
b. 153
|
composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor
..
The staccato dot, placed in A high above the note, could have been overlooked by Fontana, which would explain its absence in FE (→EE). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE |
||||||
|
b. 153
|
composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor
..
According to us, both versions of pedal markings in this bar are probably authentic – added by Chopin independently to A and to [FC] (or while proofreading FE1). Therefore, in the main text we suggest a variant solution. In analogous bar 233 all sources indicate that the pedal should be pressed at the beginning of the bar. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions |
||||||
|
b. 154
|
composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor
..
The FE (→EE) rhythm is the initial version. To the main text we adopt the rhythm corrected by Chopin in A (→GE), after [FC] (→FE) had been finished – the correction is proven by small graphic details, e.g. a slightly different colour intensity of the added dots and semiquaver flags. The quaver triplet movement, prevailing both before and after this bar, allows us to assume that the variation is only of graphic nature – Chopin tried to write a rhythm in which the last played note is a triplet quaver in the simplest way possible, which, in this situation, is to be considered the most appropriate performance. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Corrections in A |
||||||
|
b. 155
|
composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor
..
The staccato dot visible in A (→GE) could have been overlooked by the copyist in [FC] or by the engraver of FE. However, since in FE (→EE) the dot is also absent in analogous bar 235, it is more likely that Chopin added both dots to A after the copy, the basis for FE, had been finished. category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||
|
b. 155-156
|
composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor
..
As in bars 68-69, both the A version with three accents and the FE one with one accent are authentic, hence they can be regarded as equal. Contrary to the aforementioned bars, as well as to the third analogous place in bars 235-236, in this case the A accents do not seem long, and none of the editions reproduced them as such. According to us, however, it is highly unlikely that this difference could have stemmed from something other than the inaccuracies in the notation of the discussed bars. In the variant solution of the main text (due to the number of accents), we suggest long accents. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Long accents , EE revisions |
at beginning of bar in 
