b. 26-30
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
In EF, the 6th quaver in bar 26 is provided with the sign, which does not appear in the remaining sources. In bars 28 and 30, the indication is featured only in FEF and only in the first part of the piece (it is absent in Da Capo written out in notes). We do not include those most probably added by Fontana indications in the main text. category imprint: Differences between sources |
|||||||||||
b. 27
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
In the main text we give the probably later version of PE with a rest instead of an extension of the previous semiquaver. category imprint: Differences between sources |
|||||||||||
b. 27-29
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
To the main text we adopt two signs present in PE in bars 27 and 29. The first of them is also in EF (in JC there is no sign). In turn, we do not consider the short at the beginning of bar 27, which seems to be left mistakenly. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Sign reversal , Errors in PE |
|||||||||||
b. 28
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
The rest separating the first four-bar section, in B major, from the subsequent three bars in C minor is only in JC and EF. In the version of PE, based on the later autograph, Chopin resigned from this practically hardly noticeable detail of notation. In JC, the chord in the R.H. is written in a single-voice manner, as in bars 26 and 30. category imprint: Differences between sources |
|||||||||||
b. 28
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
The slur in PE probably comes from [A]. Its appearance exactly in this place may be related to the change of the rhythmic value of the chord on the 3rd beat of the bar. category imprint: Differences between sources |