Issues : GE revisions
b. 429-432
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
Ignored dashes marking the range of cresc. is a frequent inaccuracy of the first Chopinesque editions. The fact that GE2 added dashes only in bar 429 may be explained by an inaccuracy (it is the last bar on the page in GE2 – cf. bars 469-474). However, further dashes may have been thought to be contrary to the hairpins. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions |
||||||||
b. 430-433
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
The engraver of GE1 (→FE→EE) may have considered the double slurs to be an unnecessary complication. Cf. bars 472-480. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions |
||||||||
b. 430
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
The omission of the hairpin in GE1 (→FE→EE) must be an oversight of the engraver. The sign was added in GE2 on the basis of A. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions |
||||||||
b. 433
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
In A the notation of accidentals in this bar is inaccurate:
The necessary signs were added already in GE1 (→FE); however, the before the bottom note of the octave in the L.H. at the beginning of the bar was overlooked. EE and GE2 feature the correct notation. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals , Errors of A , Accidental below/above the note |
||||||||
b. 433
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
 
category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in GE , GE revisions , Errors repeated in FE |