b. 298
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
The fingering digit, written in FED between the staves, could also refer to d1 in the R.H., which is, however, much less likely from the pianistic point of view. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources |
||||||
b. 298
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
The traces of proofreading in print, visible in FE, allow us to state that the penultimate semiquaver was initially a b1. It was most probably the original version, since it seems to be highly unlikely that the note could have been printed by mistake. category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information issues: Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||
b. 299-301
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
The missing marks in GE1 (→GE2) are probably a result of inadvertence of the engraver of GE1 – cf. the notes in bar 300. The addition in GE3 was based on the mark in bar 285, probably erroneous. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions |
||||||
b. 299
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
Omission of the slur in the L.H. only in the first out of four similar bars must be considered an inaccuracy. The slur was added in EE and GE3. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |
||||||
b. 300
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
The most bottom note of the quaver chord in GE1 is an erroneous f1, which was corrected already in GE2 (→GE3). category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , Terzverschreibung error , GE revisions |