Issues : Errors in FE
|
b. 222
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major
..
In FE (→GE,EE), there is a category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in EE |
|
|
b. 227
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major
..
In FE, there are no accidentals whatsoever in this bar. It is undoubtedly an error commited possibly by Chopin in [A] – cf. Etude in F minor, op. 25 no. 2, bar 56. Accidentals were added in both GE and EE: category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Errors in EE , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals |
|
|
b. 234
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Omissions to cancel alteration , GE revisions , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in EE |
|
|
b. 241-242
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major
..
In FE (→EE1→EE2), the beginning of a slur continued in the next bar in a new line in the R.H. is missing. The mistake was corrected in GE. In turn, in EE3, the notation is ambiguous – the reviser added a separate slur for the triplet at the end of bar 241 and left the extended beginning of the slur in bar 242. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions , EE inaccuracies , Uncertain slur continuation , Errors repeated in EE |
|
|
b. 242
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major
..
category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Errors in GE , GE revisions |
before the 6th semiquaver. A comparison with four analogous bars (54, 62, 78 and 362) proves a mistake of the engraver in this place.
before the lower note of the third on the 2nd quaver, thus confirming a
1 there. This mistaken addition was corrected in