b. 58
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
The tie sustaining d in this bar is probably an arbitrary addition by Fontana, perhaps modelled on original version of bar 59. category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||||
b. 58
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
Change of d1 into c1 is an undeniable improvement here, introduced into [A] (→PE). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Enharmonic corrections |
||||||||||
b. 58
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
Three subsequent signs visible in PE are most probably long accents (in Chopin's notation such signs ordered in a sequence, even if they are not long enough to be considered as accents, are similar in their meaning). However, it is only the first one that does not raise any doubts, both as the type of sign and its position are concerned. Therefore, in the case of the remaining two, we give both their literal reading and the most probable, according to us, interpretation. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in PE |
||||||||||
b. 58
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
The authenticity of fingering of FEF is dubious: it is not included in GEF, which most probably means that it was added only during a later proofing of FEF, therefore, it was not featured in the sources available to Fontana while editing the Polonaise. In spite of this, we propose to include it in the main text in a variant form (in brackets) due to its obvious accuracy and concordance with the style of Chopin's fingering. category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||||
b. 58
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
The general compatibility of slurring in EF and PE – such a type of minor doubt concerning the starting point of a slur is rather a rule than exception in reading Chopin's autographs – allows to assume that they could be in [AI] (overseen in JC or added after its preparation). category imprint: Differences between sources |