Pitch
b. 131
|
composition: Op. 19, Bolero
..
The version of EE is almost certainly arbitrary – nothing indicates a possibility of a Chopinesque proofreading of the edition; there is also no reason to assume an oversight of by Chopin. Similarly, in bar 243. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
|||||
b. 141
|
composition: Op. 19, Bolero
..
GE has a before the last semiquaver in the L.H. This erroneous accidental was present also in FE, yet it was removed in the last phase of proofreading. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: FE revisions , Errors repeated in GE |
|||||
b. 141
|
composition: Op. 19, Bolero
..
In GE, there is no returning e2 on the penultimate semiquaver in the R.H. The mistake was most probably also in FE, where it was corrected in the last phase of proofreading. Similarly, in bar 173. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Omissions to cancel alteration , FE revisions , Errors repeated in GE |
|||||
b. 141
|
composition: Op. 19, Bolero
category imprint: Differences between sources |
|||||
b. 143
|
composition: Op. 19, Bolero
..
In the main text we give g2 present in the base source, i.e. FE (→EE). The authenticity of this version is supported both by source arguments – Chopin did not question this note both in the proofreading of FE and in any of the pupil's copies – and stylistic ones – cf. similar passages in other compositions by Chopin, e.g. in the Sonata in B minor, op. 58, 1st mov., bar 19. The f2 note was probably introduced in the proofreading of GE, replacing g2 of the version of FE; however, one does not know whether it was performed by Chopin. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Authentic corrections of GE |