Issues : GE revisions
|
b. 466-470
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
In the main text, we preserve the version of FE (→GE1→GE2), devoid of accents in the L.H. in bars 466 and 470. In EE, accents were added in both bars, in GE3 – only in bar 470. We consider the additions to be unjustified due to the function of this bar in the structure of the two- and four-bar section – see bar 458. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 467
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
According to us, the absence of a staccato mark over the 1st quaver is an oversight. In the main text, we suggest a wedge, since it appears in the majority of similar places. The mark was added here already in GE. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: GE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 468-469
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
In the main text, we suggest adding long accents after analogous bars 460-461 and 456-457 and 464-465. Accents (short) were added already in EE as well as in GE3. category imprint: Editorial revisions issues: Long accents , EE revisions , GE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 468
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
The shorter slur in GE must have been an arbitrary decision, perhaps resulting from a comparison with analogous bar 460. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 469
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
It seems likely that the accent in FE (→GE1→GE2) was placed over a wrong note (instead of over the dotted g category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |
2-g