Issues : GE revisions
|
b. 54
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
..
Change of slurring in GE3 is a typical example of a routine revision – a separate slur for the 2nd beat of the bar resembles rather bowing than a pianistic gesture. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |
|||||||||||
|
b. 56
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
..
The tie of g category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , GE revisions , Annotations in FES |
|||||||||||
|
b. 56
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
..
The fingering added in GE3 is obvious in this context. Its addition was probably aimed at underlining the necessity to hold the semibreve with hand and not with pedal, which, due to the change of the harmony in the middle of the bar, has to be released (changed). The choice of the places in which the reviser of this edition added fingering seems to be highly subjective – apart from this place, additional indications are to be found only in bar 123. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |
|||||||||||
|
b. 58
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |
|||||||||||
|
b. 58
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
..
Like in analogous bar 17, in the main text we suggest a whole-bar slur in the part of the L.H. Such a slur was added in GE3, whereas in EE, each half of the bar was embraced with a separate slur, perhaps due to the lack of space. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |
2 repeated in 
was added before f
