b. 538
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
The lack of c1 note in the chord must have resutled form the GE engraver 's misinterpretation of GC. To determine if the middle note of the chord notated on the ledger line is actually there is rather difficult also in Chopin's autographs. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE |
||||||||
b. 540-541
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
In the main text we present a slur based on EE and GC (→GE) which is easier to interpret. The FE slur, ending in b. 541, i.e. the last one on this edition's page, may raise doubts as for the correctness of its scope copied into FE. category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||
b. 540-541
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
In EE the slur begins as early as in b. 541, close to its beginning even though there are no notes (no even rest) there. category imprint: Source & stylistic information issues: EE inaccuracies |
||||||||
b. 540-565
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
No continuation of the dashed line determining the scope of cresc. on the new page in FE (from b. 542) must be an error. The replacemnent of a typical abbreviation with a full word split into syllables is a characteristic revison of EE. In the main text we present the GC (→GE) version. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE |
||||||||
b. 541
|
composition: Op. 39, Scherzo in C♯ minor
..
No mark in FE or mark in b. 539 must be an error as in b. 544 the mark appears and performing all bars 538-544 sustained is unthinkable. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE |