b. 47-48
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt I
..
No in GE1 is almost certainly an oversight. The sign was added in GE2, in a form which, however, deviates from the notation of GC. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins , Errors in GE , GE revisions |
||||||||
b. 48
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt I
..
The slur in GC is a typical "triplet" slur. Embracing with it the entire bar in GE is most probably a revision inspired by the slur in bar 44. However, the identical slur in FE (→EE) can be a result of Chopin's correction in [A]. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Triplet slurs |
||||||||
b. 49
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt I
..
In the main text we give the pedalling of GC. GE1 reproduced it inaccurately, which was corrected in GE2, yet then repeated in EE2. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions |
||||||||
b. 49
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt I
..
The arpeggio sign is already present in FE1, based directly on [A], and almost certainly uncorrected by Chopin. This suggests the absence of the sign in GC (→GE) is probably an oversight. Similarly in bar 65. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors of GC |
||||||||
b. 49-50
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt I
..
In the main text we reproduce the notation of the principal source, i.e. FE (see General Editorial Principles and the characterisation of FE4). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins |