|
b. 183-184
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt IV
..
The shorter L.H. slur is an inaccuracy, probably forced by the lack of space to lead a longer slur. The undoubtedly accidental omission of both slurs in EE1 was corrected in EE2. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Errors in EE |
||||||||
|
b. 184
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt IV
..
The issue of the presence and the type of staccato marks at the beginning of the bar may be questionable. In A the mark over C may be interpreted as a small wedge or an inaccurate dot; however, it is unclear whether the faint blot over the R.H. chord (to the right of the chord axis) bears any meaning at all. In the main text we assume the existence of two marks, which we reproduce as dots. An alternative solution includes only the unambiguous mark over the L.H., interpreted as a wedge. According to us, the version of the editions devoid of any marks does not comply with the A notation. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , Wedges , Inaccuracies in A |
||||||||
|
b. 185
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt IV
..
In the main text we omit the cautionary category imprint: Editorial revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 185
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt IV
..
In the main text we keep the A (→GE) slur, being a part of the irregular group marking. In the remaining editions it was transformed into an articulation slur, which can be considered an acceptable variant, as in later pieces Chopin would often change the initially written "rhythmic" slurs into articulation ones – cf., e.g. the Etude in C minor, Op. 10 No. 12, bars 52-62. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Triplet slurs |
||||||||
|
b. 186
|
composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt IV
..
The missing slur is most probably due to an oversight by the engraver of GE. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE |
to a
, present in all sources, which is totally unjustified here.
