b. 81
|
composition: Op. 38, Ballade in F major category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: GE revisions |
|||||
b. 81
|
composition: Op. 38, Ballade in F major
..
category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |
|||||
b. 83
|
composition: Op. 38, Ballade in F major
..
The additional c2 crotchet in EE is probably an editorial revision, aiming at filling the bar in the part of the R.H. The reviser may have not understood that the a crotchet on the bottom stave was to be performed by the R.H. The change is also related to an earlier start of the slur. For a more detailed explanation of the slurring – see the previous note. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
|||||
b. 83
|
composition: Op. 38, Ballade in F major
..
In A it is not clear whether the slur from the previous bars is supposed to reach the 1st crotchet in bar 83. According to us, the clearly dragged slurs at the end of bar 82 (in both hands) have an advantage over the lack of their ending at the beginning of bar 83. Therefore, we suggest this interpretation in the main text. In the part of the L.H. this version was not reproduced in any of the remaining sources, while in the part of the R.H. – only in FE. In EE – most probably due to the arbitrarily added crotchet in the R.H. – the next slur begins already from the beginning of the bar. In GE2 (→GE3) the slurs in the R.H. in bars 82-83 were arbitrarily combined. The slurring variants of the R.H. are available in the subsequent note. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources |
|||||
b. 84
|
composition: Op. 38, Ballade in F major
..
In GC there is no b1 quaver in the bottom voice in the R.H. It is probably an oversight – cf. similar situations in bars 28 and 42. Contrary to those bars, in the discussed place the incomplete version of GC was repeated in GE without any changes. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Errors of GC |