Issues : Long accents
|
b. 32
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
In spite of writing the bottom arm with great flourish, the sign in A is undoubtedly a long accent on the 2nd crotchet in the bar. The visible accents on the 1st crotchet in the editions are a result of misunderstanding the notation of A. Similarly in bar 34. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE |
||||||||
|
b. 34
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
Same as in bar 32, the interpretation of the long accent on the 3rd quaver as a diminuendo filling the 1st crotchet in the bar is a result of a total misunderstanding of Chopin's notation by the engraver of GE1 (→FE→EE, →GE2). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE |
||||||||
|
b. 51-54
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
Out of four long accents written in A, GE1 reproduced correctly only the first and third, which was unified in the remaining editions, by giving short accents only. It is a result of considering long accents either inaccurately written common accents or short diminuendoes. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE |
||||||||
|
b. 60
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
The typical long accent visible in A was falsely reproduced in the editions as a diminuendo hairpin, which would frequently happen in Chopin's works – cf. e.g. the Etude in A minor, Op. 10 No. 2, bar 8 and 12. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 71-72
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
Short accents in EE is an inaccuracy resulting from not using the sign of a long accent. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , EE inaccuracies |
in 
