b. 60
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
The indication is only in EF. Its authenticity becomes a problem if we take into consideration the indications cresc. and in bars 61-62 in PE, which undoubtedly come from the autograph. According to us, those and previous dynamic indications of PE suggest only a local climax in the described place and a return to the dynamics from the beginning of the Trio (), to sum up, an effect which can be marked with the indication . category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||||
b. 60
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
In the main text we consider the wedge of PE, most probably coming from [A]. Same in bar 96. category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||||
b. 60
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
The first chord in JC and EF is a dotted semiquaver; moreover, there is no rest, which would be superfluous in this situation. It is certainly an earlier version. In the main text, we give the version of PE with a rest after the 1st chord. The above described rhythmic difference is matched with varying performance markings – a slur in EF and a wedge and slur in PE. category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||||
b. 60
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
The arpeggio in EF may be an addition by Fontana, although, e.g., an oversight in JC cannot be excluded. Having faith in the correctness of the version of PE, we give it in the main text. category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||||
b. 60
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
In JC, under the lowest note of the chord, b, there is also g (without the extending dot), which is probably one of a few uncorrected mistakes (cf. e.g. bar 53). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors of JC |