|
b. 48
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Omission of current key accidentals , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in EE |
|||||
|
b. 48-49
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major
..
In the main text, we adjust the semiquaver beam of the figure at the transition between bars 48-49 to the remaining, analogous figures. It is likely that breaking it into two beams was a simplifying solution of the engraver of FE, applied to avoid beams passing from one great stave to another. Chopin would often use beams going beyond a bar, e.g. in the L.H. part in bars 52-54 and analog. category imprint: Editorial revisions issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , EE inaccuracies |
|||||
|
b. 49
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major
..
The f3 note, present in FE (→GE,EE) as the 6th semiquaver of the bar, interferes with the regularity of the figuration and is most probably erroneous. It is confirmed by a most probably Chopinesque correction in FEJ. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Errors in FE , Errors in EE , Errors in GE , Annotations in FEJ |
|||||
|
b. 52
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major
..
The indications added in EE2 (→EE3) are totally arbitrary in this place. The reviser could have assumed that the beginning of the actual Rondo should be provided with a specific dynamic marking, particularly since such indications appear only just in bar 90 (dolce e leggiero) and 100 ( category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
|||||
|
b. 52-62
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major
..
The slurs under the bass B category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
lowering c3 to c
3 was overlooked on the 2nd quaver of the bar in 
dolce in 
). While adding them, he used authentic indications, present in bars 39 and 143. There is a similar situation in bar 360.
