Issues : Errors in FE
|
b. 5
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
In FE the bottom note of the 1st crotchet is an erroneous f1 instead of a category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Terzverschreibung error |
||||||||
|
b. 7
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
The first two fingering digits missing in this bar is certainly an oversight of FE (→EE1). The digits were added in EE2 (→EE3). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE |
||||||||
|
b. 29-31
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
The range of the slurs of the R.H. in A is beyond doubt, although none of them transcends the bar line (cf. the slurs in the L.H., written more accurately). The slurs of GE1 surprise with their inaccuracy, and the ones of FE (→EE) even more. The notation of A was interpreted correctly only in GE2. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions , Errors repeated in EE |
||||||||
|
b. 31-32
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
In the main text we give the slur of A (→GE). Due to the careless work of the engravers, the slurs in FE and EE are certainly erroneous. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , EE inaccuracies |
||||||||
|
b. 35
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
In FE all 5 notes in the part of the R.H. are combined with a quaver beam. The patent mistake was corrected in EE. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Rhythmic errors |
1 – cf. analogous bar 329 as well as similar situations in bars 11, 13, 27, 29 and analog., which always include a
