Issues : Annotations in teaching copies
|
b. 91
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
..
The variant written in FEH bears all the hallmarks of authenticity – pianistic and harmonic dexterity as well as the smoothness of the transition to the next bar (cf. a similar procedure in the variants added in the Nocturne in D category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Authentic post-publication changes and variants , Annotations in FEH |
||||||||||
|
b. 91
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||||
|
b. 91
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
..
In FE, there are no accidentals before the 4th semiquaver in the R.H. and the bottom note of the 3rd quaver in the L.H. Oversights of the symbols of the current key, typical of Chopin, were corrected both in GE and EE. A sharp in the L.H. was added also in FEH and FES. In the latter, cautionary double sharps before f category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals , Annotations in FES , Last key signature sign , Annotations in FEH |
||||||||||
|
b. 92
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
..
In FES there is a category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Cautionary accidentals , Annotations in FES |
||||||||||
|
b. 94
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
..
In the main text, we give the fingering written by Chopin in FES. The entry in FED most probably indicates the same fingering, specifying its most characteristic fragment. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FED , Annotations in FES |
1 in 
1 in 
major, op. 27, no. 2, 
written in before b
