



Issues : EE inaccuracies
b. 58
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
..
In FE (→GE), the last quaver in the L.H. (e) was placed under b1 in the R.H., which does not correspond to the rhythmic relationship resulting from the even filling of the last three semiquavers in the bar with small notes in the R.H. It may correspond to the notation of [A], but neither the first publishers of Chopin's pieces nor the composer himself were always precise in this matter. Due to this reason, in the main text we place that e according to the rhythmic division, just before the 7th note of the roulade (g category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE inaccuracies |
||||||||||
b. 65-67
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
..
The long accents at the beginning of bar 65 and 67, legible both in FE and GE, were reduced in EE to common, short accent. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , EE inaccuracies |
||||||||||
b. 92-94
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
..
It is difficult to consider the missing slur in GE an oversight, since the slur in FE consists of two sections in two lines of the text. Therefore, the engraver of GE would have had to overlook two marks (as well as the wedges at the beginning of bar 94). It means that the slur was almost certainly added by Chopin in the last phase of proofreading of FE. A shorter slur in EE is probably a result of the engraver's inaccuracy. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE inaccuracies , Authentic corrections of FE |