Select: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Notation
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main


b. 64-66

composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt II

..

In the main text we include the cautionary  added in GE (→FE,EE,IE) on the 3rd beat in bar 64. Moreover, we add such an accidental to a2 in bar 66.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions

b. 65

composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt II

in A

Longer  in GE (→FE,IE) & EE2

..

The extended  hairpin in GE (→FE,IE) is due to the GE engraver, who would often perform such revisions to hairpins in this Sonata. In EE1 the mark was overlooked, which was corrected in EE2, on the basis of GE.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in EE , GE revisions

b. 65

composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt II

Accent in A

No mark in GE (→FE,EE,IE)

..

The missing accent in GE (→FE,EE,IE) could be explained by an oversight by the GE engraver. However, he could have omitted the mark on purpose when it turned out that due to the small gap between the great staves, the mark placed over the R.H. in this bar could have been erroneously assigned to the L.H. crotchet in bar 59, placed above this bar.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE

b. 66

composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt II

Staccato dot in A (→GE)

No mark in FE, EE & IE

..

In GE the staccato dot was placed at the end of the stem, as a result of which it was not reproduced by any of the remaining editions.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE

b. 66

composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt II

Short accent in A

Long accent in GE (→FE,IE)

No mark in EE

..

Although the A mark suggests the use of a short accent, in the main text we suggest a long accent due to the context of a long note, typical for long accents, additionally provided with a ten. indication (the issue of inaccurately written long accents in A – see mov. IV, bars 108-109). The editions also contain a long accent, extended, probably due to the fact that it was considered a diminuendo mark.
The absence of the mark in EE is most probably due to an oversight.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , Errors in EE