b. 4
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt I
..
The comparison with analogous bar 8, 182 and 186 indicates that we are most probably dealing with Chopin's mistake, who forgot to write the letter z in the 3rd mark. Due to the above, we suggest adding it to the main text. category imprint: Editorial revisions issues: Inaccuracies in A |
|||||
b. 4
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt I
..
The fact that the EE2 reviser added an indication cancelling the formally applicable is justified, since is most probably a mistake here – see the previous note. According to us, one should probably refer here to the dynamics at the beginning of the Sonata's first phrase, that is . The indication added by EE2 is a compromise solution and does not represent typical Chopinesque dynamic markings – the composer would generally mark the dynamics between and as m.v. (mezza voce). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
|||||
b. 7
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt I
..
Leaving the L.H. quaver motif without a slur seems to be Chopin's inadvertence, since the motif's structure and nature clearly refer to the Sonata's opening motif. Admittedly, similar figures are quite often provided with inconsistent slurs in the Sonata, yet in this case it is more likely that we are dealing with the composer's oversight, as evidenced by the slur in the analogous bar in the recapitulation (bar 185). Taking into account the above, in the main text we add a slur modelled after that bar. category imprint: Editorial revisions |
|||||
b. 9-13
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt I
..
In the main text we omit the inauthentic R.H. fingering added by EE in bars 9-11 and 13. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
|||||
b. 11
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt I category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: GE revisions |