Issues : EE revisions
b. 26
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
Omission of the sign in GE1 (→FE) is certainly a mistake. The sign was added in EE (arbitrarily) and GE2 (after A). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in GE , No pedal release mark |
||||||||||||
b. 27-28
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
It is difficult to say whether the earlier beginning of the 1st slur in bar 27 and both in bar 28 in EE is an inaccuracy or a revision coming from the conviction that the notation of FE is inaccurate. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
||||||||||||
b. 28
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
In EE the group of 27 demisemiquavers was written with small notes, most probably in order to save space. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
||||||||||||
b. 29-30
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
Interpretation of the slurs beginning in bar 29 encounters difficulties, since both the first and the second are written in A in a way allowing for various interpretations. The first, when interpreted literally, would separate the grace notes starting the trill from the trilled note, hence it has to reach either further, which we consider the text of A, or closer, as it was interpreted in GE (→FE→EE). The second begins over the triplet, yet an intention of it having started earlier cannot be entirely excluded. Therefore, one can deem the interpretation of GE (→FE) to be justified too; even the version of EE cannot be definitely considered to be incompatible with Chopin's intention. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccurate slurs in A , GE revisions |
||||||||||||
b. 30
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
The slur written in A over the group of 15 demisemiquavers was, according to Chopin's intention, certainly supposed to embrace the entire group, which, as far as the right end is concerned, was interpreted in this way in GE (→FE→EE). In turn, the fact of initiating it already from the previous semiquaver, as it is in GE (→FE), is certainly a mistake. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccurate slurs in A |