|
b. 124-126
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
The slur in FE was added probably in the last phase of proofreading; hence it is absent in GE1 (→GE2). It is indicated by the shape of the slur, adjusted to the already existing elements of notation with difficulty. The slur was added in GE3 (also in the L.H.). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||||
|
b. 124-126
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 124
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
Initially, FEH copied the 4th finger for the 1st semiquaver in bar 124, which was then changed to the 5th one, which distinguished that fingering from the one given by Fontana in EE. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Differences in fingering , Annotations in FEH |
||||||||
|
b. 124-125
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||
|
b. 126-127
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
It is difficult to determine how come that the correct text of GE2 (excluding the mistake in the 1st quaver in bar 127, discussed separately) was changed to the impoverished version of GE2a. Perhaps a worn-out fragment of a plate was re-engraved in order to remove the increasingly pronounced printing defects. Traces of such procedures are to be found, e.g. in the Concerto in F Minor, Op. 21 – see the characterization of its GE1a. It also happened that various mistakes were committed in a newly engraved text, most frequently, precisely, oversights. However, in the discussed place printing defects are visible rather on the available copies of GE2a; hence after possible corrections (cf. e.g. the copy from the National Library in Warsaw). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors resulting from corrections , Errors in GE , GE revisions |
