data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/73ecd/73ecd80c88ad44c39f3711b6bcc33ca9e1021267" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/75013/75013441a15e45e6f391d55c49aaf803f3dff8a4" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/57140/571405c7057401412640722d57e0f4262876af22" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3075f/3075f31e8b155e01785c3a53896ad205598099cf" alt=""
b. 31
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt II category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Accidentals in different octaves , GE revisions , Inaccuracies in A |
|||||
b. 31
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt II
..
As was the case with dimin., the absence of a category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions |
|||||
b. 31
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt II
..
The GE engraver (→FE,EE,IE) probably omitted the verbal indication to make the engraving process easier – dimin. could have seemed superfluous in the face of the diminuendo hairpin in the same place (the second category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |
|||||
b. 32
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt II
..
In the main text we suggest a more legible version of the 2nd and 3rd beat in the R.H. part than the original one. Our suggestion is justified by a situation in mov. IV of the Sonata in which Chopin used two different versions of notation in the same phrase: the first time he wrote down a chord using ties within a bar – cf. bar 57 and 61 – and the second time he switched to a neater version with the use of greater rhythmic values and division into parts. category imprint: Editorial revisions |
|||||
b. 32-33
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt II
category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE |