|
b. 93
|
composition: Op. 22, Polonaise
..
According to us, a comparison with the next bar, in which d is tied, makes it highly likely that the tie in the discussed bar was accidentally overlooked. This is how it was evaluated in EE and GE2 (→GE3). category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |
|||||||||
|
b. 93
|
composition: Op. 22, Polonaise
..
The absence of the slur in FE (→GE1) – irrespective of the reason – must be considered a mistake. In the main text we give the same slur as the one featured in FE in the next bar. The slur was also added in EE and GE2 (→GE3); however, none of them took into account the authentic slur from analogous b. 94. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |
|||||||||
|
b. 93-94
|
composition: Op. 22, Polonaise
..
The staccato dots added in GE2 (→GE3) cannot come from Chopin, although standardising articulation between the left and right hands in such a passage, led in parallel in both hands, may seem rational. However, the Polonaise contains a greater number of similar situations, e.g. in b. 26, 101, 229, 277, hence we try to limit such editorial additions to the situations in which there is an indication to assume that such actions are compliant with Chopin's intention (e.g. in b. 78). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |
|||||||||
|
b. 94
|
composition: Op. 22, Polonaise
..
The missing tie of G is most probably a mistake of the engraver of GE. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE |
|||||||||
|
b. 94
|
composition: Op. 22, Polonaise
..
A comparison with the previous bar, in which b is tied, makes it likely that the tie was accidentally overlooked. The tie was added in GE. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: GE revisions |
