Issues : Errors in GE
|
b. 291-295
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
The ben marcato indication, placed in FE (→EE) under the semiquavers in the L.H. in bar 291, was considered in GE to be applying to the stave below, on which there is bar 295 in that place. At the same time, in order to avoid the problematic combination with dolce, ben marcato was moved to between the staves. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE |
||||||
|
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 category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , 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 f category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , Terzverschreibung error , GE revisions |
||||||
|
b. 300
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
In GE1, the quaver flag next to the first chord (after the grace note) was overlooked. This patent mistake was corrected already in GE2 (→GE3). category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions , Rhythmic errors |
||||||
|
b. 300
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
In GE1, the last note in the L.H. is an e1. A comparison with analogous bars 284, 286 and 302 proves the engraver's mistake. It was corrected in subsequent GE. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions |
in 
in 
1, which was corrected already in