|
b. 84
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
According to us, the slur in A is an example of a slur-tenuto, encountered on a number of occasions in Chopin's autographs. In the editions, the ending of the slur, dragged too far, was considered inaccurate. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Tenuto slurs |
|||||||||||||
|
b. 84
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
The category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , EE inaccuracies |
|||||||||||||
|
b. 85-86
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
Two slurs of A, defining the phrasing of these two bars, were replaced in GE1 (→FE→EE) with three slurs dividing the phrase into half- and whole-bar sections, which was only partially corrected in GE2. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions |
|||||||||||||
|
b. 85
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
Both authentic notations of the ornament – A and FE (→EE) – mean the same performance. The mistake of GE1 originated from an unrecognised arpeggio sign in the vertical slur, which, at that period of Chopin's life, would increasingly replace the more accurately written signs in the form of a wavy line. The way the slur was added in GE2 caused that the proper sense of the Chopin notation was still not conveyed in this edition. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE |
|||||||||||||
|
b. 86
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions |
in 
