Issues : Errors in FE
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next »
b. 43-44
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 2, Mazurka in A♭ major
..
The fact that the slur in FE starts later is probably a mistake caused by the transition into a new line. The correct text in EE is probably a result of revision on the basis of comparison with analogous b. 12-13. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE |
||||||||
b. 61-62
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 2, Mazurka in A♭ major
..
Both the absence of a slur next to the grace note in b. 61 and reproducing the slur in b. 62 as a conventional mark, combining the grace note with the top (g1) and not bottom (c1) note of the quaver, must be a mistake and inaccuracy of FE (→EE). It is also GE2 that features conventional slurs in both places. In the main text we give the compliant notation of A1 and GE2, in which the slurs most probably indicate an arpeggio: . category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , GE revisions |
||||||||
b. 69
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 2, Mazurka in A♭ major
..
The missing slur next to the grace note is an oversight of the engraver of FE (→EE) and most probably also of the engraver of GE1. In the main text we give the slur of A1. The conventional little slur added in GE2 is an arbitrary revision. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Errors in GE , GE revisions |
||||||||
b. 71
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 2, Mazurka in A♭ major category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE |
||||||||
b. 71
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 2, Mazurka in A♭ major
..
The missing slur next to the grace note is an oversight of the engraver of FE (→EE). In the main text we give the slur of A1 and GE1. In GE2 that slur was arbitrarily changed to a conventional little slur. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , GE revisions |
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next »