Issues : Uncertain slur continuation
|
b. 137-138
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major
..
In FE (→GE,EE), the slur begins from the 1st note of bar 138, in spite of the fact that at the end of the previous bar (a line above) the slur clearly points to a continuation. In two previous similar places (bars 113-114 and 121-122), the slur over the bar line is combined and separated, respectively. Interestingly, in FE, it is exactly the same when the theme returns – a continuous slur in bars 265-266, a separated slur in bars 273-274 and an ambiguous one in bars 289-290. However, in the case of the latter, the slur begins on the last quaver of the bar, which practically excludes an interpretation other than a continuous slur. In the case of the discussed bar, it also allows us to tip the scales in favour of a continuous slur. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Editorial revisions issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Uncertain slur continuation , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in EE |
|||||
|
b. 230
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major
..
The engravers of GE and EE overlooked the ending of the slur in the L.H. while transitioning to a new great stave (bar 230 opens a new line). It belongs to the most frequent mistakes. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Errors in EE , Errors in GE , Uncertain slur continuation |
|||||
|
b. 230
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major
..
The slurring over bars 229-230 is equivocal in the sources – the slur in bar 229 (at the end of staff) points to the continuation but in bar 230 a new slur begins. Comparison with the analogous bars 369-370 shows that Chopin almost certainly intended a continuous slur. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Source & stylistic information issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Uncertain slur continuation , 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. 255-256
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major
..
In FE, there is no beginning of the slur in the L.H. in bar 255 (the last bar in the great stave) – there is only its ending in bar 256 (the first bar in a new line). It was corrected both in GE and EE. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Source & stylistic information issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , Uncertain slur continuation |
