|
b. 53
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt II
..
In the main text we omit the unjustified (cautionary?) category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: GE revisions , Cautionary accidentals , Last key signature sign |
|||||
|
b. 54-55
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt II
..
The later starting point of the slurs in the parts of both hands does not seem to be a random mistake by the FE engraver. However, it is difficult to indicate the reason behind this revision. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: FE revisions |
|||||
|
b. 58-60
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt II
..
When interpreted literally, the pairs of dynamic marks in these bars look like a crescendo and an accent. However, the comparison with an analogous phrase in bars 49-52 and with bar 57 proves that – which was already noticed in GE (→FE,EE,IE) – Chopin intended them to be pairs of category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions , Inaccuracies in A |
|||||
|
b. 60-61
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt II
..
In both bars Chopin wrote a dotted crotchet rest, which was changed in GE (→FE,EE,IE) to a standard version of notation using a crotchet and a quaver rest. We reproduce Chopin's notation only in the graphic transcription. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: GE revisions |
|||||
|
b. 64
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt II
..
In the sources the repeat sign faces only the left, which, considering the same sign at the end of the movement (bar 80), is a patent mistake. In young Chopin's pieces there are several such inaccuracies – cf. the Polonaise in A category imprint: Editorial revisions issues: Differences in form , Inaccuracies in A |
to the c
minim, present in all sources. We do not include the 
hairpins in 
minor, Op. 26 No. 1,