b. 265
|
composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor
..
In A (→GE) there is no restoring g2 in the middle of the bar. Chopin's patent oversight was corrected in FE (→EE), which could have been done by Chopin himself in [FC] or while proofreading FE1. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Omissions to cancel alteration , Errors of A , Authentic corrections of FE , Errors repeated in GE |
|||
b. 266-267
|
composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor
..
As in analogous bars 109-116, the slurs over the octave sequences are certainly supposed to reach the final crotchets. It was generally precisely marked in the sources except a minor inaccuracy due to the transition to a new line – in A and FE there is no ending of the slur from bar 276 in bar 277. It was corrected both in GE and EE. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , Uncertain slur continuation , Inaccuracies in A |
|||
b. 266
|
composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor
..
The absence of a2 in FE (→EE) probably resulted from the inaccurate [FC] notation – notes written down as dots, as it was performed by both Chopin and Fontana, were sometimes very poorly visible at the intersection of a stem and a ledger line. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Uncertain notes on ledger lines |
|||
b. 266
|
composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor
..
The range of the FE slur deviates from the slurs in all three previous analogous places (bars 95-96, 99-100 and 262-263), which suggests a mistake by the copyist or by the engraver. category imprint: Differences between sources |
|||
b. 269
|
composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor
..
In EE2 a cautionary was added to e2 in the last quaver. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |