b. 56
|
composition: Op. 27 No 2, Nocturne in D♭ major
..
The accent in A is not a typical long accent, yet this interpretation becomes much more probable if we take into account the analogous phrases of the Nocturne and similar context in other works. The editions have a short accent here.. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Long accents |
||||||
b. 56
|
composition: Op. 27 No 2, Nocturne in D♭ major
..
The rhythmic group on the 4th quaver of the bar was mistakenly written in A with the use of notes with twice as long rhythmic values : . In GE that mistake was only partly corrected: , and it was in FE (→EE) that the correct text was inserted: . category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions , Rhythmic errors , Errors of A , FE revisions |
||||||
b. 56
|
composition: Op. 27 No 2, Nocturne in D♭ major
..
It is not certain which staccato sign Chopin actually had in mind in A. The comparison with analogous situations makes us consider a wedge to be more likely than a dot. Still, the editions have the dot. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE |
||||||
b. 56
|
composition: Op. 27 No 2, Nocturne in D♭ major
..
The right end of the slur in A fails to embrace the last note of the motif, and this is how that fragment was interpreted in GE1 (→FE→EE). In GE2, the slur was made longer so as to include the note not originally embraced but only pointed to by its right end. In our opinion that latter interpretation is probably consistent with Chopin's intention. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccurate slurs in A |
||||||
b. 56
|
composition: Op. 27 No 2, Nocturne in D♭ major
..
An inverted accent (small crescendo mark) visible in EE was added in the proofing of that edition. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |