b. 47
|
composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione
..
In the main text we include this slur, present only in A1, in a variant form. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions |
||||||
b. 48-50
|
composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione
..
Just like in b. 6-17, in A1, CJ and CK the repeated accompaniment figures are written in an abridged manner. category imprint: Source & stylistic information issues: Abbreviated notation of A |
||||||
b. 48
|
composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione
..
The last note of the 1st semiquaver triplet is written in A1 as c3. This puzzling notation – later in the sequence, a respective note an octave lower is already written as d2 (without the necessary , which is a typical Chopinesque inaccuracy) – was initially also in b. 15, in which it was, however, changed by Chopin. Since all the sources coming from [A2] feature d3, we consider the presence of c3 to be an overlooked correction of one of the analogous places (a phenomenon known from many other pieces by Chopin), hence we reproduce this notation only in the graphic transcription of A1. In the remaining sources the notation is enharmonically homogeneous, yet also inaccurate – none of the sources includes the in the last triplet of the bar; in CJ and CK it is also the lowering d3 to d3 that is missing, whereas in CB there are no naturals in this bar. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Omitted correction of an analogous place , Inaccuracies in JC |
||||||
b. 48
|
composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione
..
In the main text we include this slur, present only in A1, in a variant form. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions |
||||||
b. 48
|
composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione
..
In A1 is the only performance indication in this and the next bars until in b. 57 (except for a few R.H. slurs in b. 52-54). It cannot be ruled out that it could have been influenced by the layout – b. 49-56 fill one line of A1 and both the previous and the next lines abound in such indications. The missing top part of the second mark makes the interpretation of this marking unobvious; it could also be . A very characteristic horizontal line, common for both letters (cf., e.g. four on the 1st page of A in the Scherzo in B Minor, Op. 31) is an argument in favour of . category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources |