Issues : EE revisions
b. 37
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major
..
The marking is an arbitrary revision of EE that could have resulted from a comparison with bars 31, 33 and 35. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
|||||||
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 (). While adding them, he used authentic indications, present in bars 39 and 143. There is a similar situation in bar 360. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
|||||||
b. 52-62
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major
..
The slurs under the bass B-E motifs in bars 52-54, 56-57 and 60-62 are an arbitrary addition of EE2 (→EE3). Authentic slurs in such a context are present in analogous bars 360-370; therefore, it is likely that the quavers in the discussed bars should also be performed in such a way. However, a different performance cannot be ruled out, e.g. staccato – cf. similar motifs in bars 68-69 and 72-73. In the Polonaise in A Major, Op. 53, similar motifs constitute the framework of the main theme's accompaniment (bars 17-19 and analog.) and are provided alternately with slurs or dots. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
|||||||
b. 64
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major
..
The reviser of EE arbitrarily added a little slur combining the grace notes with the main note, most probably by comparison with the next bar. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
|||||||
b. 66-67
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major
..
The contrasting dynamic indications are a completely arbitrary addition of the revision of EE2 (→EE3). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |