b. 108-109
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt I
..
It is not certain whether the slur was added by Chopin in GC or overlooked in FE1 (→FE2). Anyways, the Chopinesque proofreading of FE3 (→FE4) and of the base text to EE does not leave any doubts concerning Chopin's intention. Cf. bars 109-110. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , Authentic corrections of FE , Authentic corrections of EE |
|||||||
b. 108
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt I
..
is an arbitrary addition of the reviser of EE2. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
|||||||
b. 108-109
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt I
..
In the main text we take into account the tie of the d1 note, written in GC (→GE) and probably overlooked in FE (→EE1). The tie was added in EE2 too. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
|||||||
b. 109-110
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt I
..
In GC (→GE) one slur embraces the part of the L.H. in both bars. The shorter slur, including only the reminiscence of the initial motif of the Sonata in bar 110, added by Chopin in the proofreading of FE3 (→FE4) and in the base text to EE, is certainly later and – according to us – it can be considered to be the final version. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: EE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE , Authentic corrections of EE |
|||||||
b. 109
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt I
..
The hairpin in GC (→GE) must be authentic (it could have been added by Chopin). In the main text we give it in brackets, as Chopin did not add the sign both in the subsequent FE and in the base text to EE, despite proofreading, e.g. the slurs in this place. Therefore, the absence of could have been accepted as emphasising a mild echo effect in bars 109-110. category imprint: Differences between sources |