b. 115-116
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
Reproducing the tie of e1 as a motivic slur of e1-c1 is undoubtedly a mistake of the engraver of FE (→EE). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE |
|||||
b. 116-117
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
Division of the slur at the bar line is a typical arbitrary decision of GE1 (→FE→EE). Moreover, a staccato dot was overlooked in bar 117, which completely distorted the image of phrasing in this fragment. In GE2 the slur was led to the quaver in bar 117, in accordance with A. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions |
|||||
b. 117
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
The fingering added in FED corresponds to Chopin indications given in an analogous situation in the next bar already in A (→GE→FE→EE). category imprint: Differences between sources |
|||||
b. 117
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions |
|||||
b. 117-118
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
None of the sources returned b1 in bar 117 and b2 in bar 118, which is a patent oversight. In turn, EE added cautionary flats before the next semiquaver in both bars, b2 and b3 respectively. We include the second of the signs in the main text. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Omissions to cancel alteration , Errors of A , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in FE , Errors repeated in EE |