Page: 
Source: 
p. 1, b. 1-18
p. 1, b. 1-18
Main text
Main text
A - Autograph
FC - Fontana's copy
FE - French edition
FE1 - First French edition
FE2 - Corrected impression of FE1
FED - Dubois copy
FEJ - Jędrzejewicz Copy
FES - Stirling copy
FESch - Scherbatoff copy
GE - German edition
GE1 - First German edition
GE2 - Revised impression of GE1
GE3 - Corrected impression of GE2
EE - English edition
EE1 - First English edition
EE1a - Corrected impression of EE1
EE2 - Revised impression of EE1a
Select notes: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Notation
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Differences
No differences
A - Autograph
FC - Fontana's copy
FE - French edition
FE1 - First French edition
FE2 - Corrected impression of FE1
FED - Dubois copy
FEJ - Jędrzejewicz Copy
FES - Stirling copy
FESch - Scherbatoff copy
GE - German edition
GE1 - First German edition
GE2 - Revised impression of GE1
GE3 - Corrected impression of GE2
EE - English edition
EE1 - First English edition
EE1a - Corrected impression of EE1
EE2 - Revised impression of EE1a
Importance
All
Important
Main
Prezentacja
Select 
copy link PDF Main text


  b. 1-14

Long accents in A, contextual interpretation

& accents in FC (→GE)

 in FE (→EE)

The  marks in b. 1-2 and analog. are of different length in A; however, the differences are clearly of an accidental nature, hence we unify them in the main text. At the same time, we give them the form of long accents, taking into account, above all, the graphical factor – it is shorter marks that definitely prevail, which can be considered long accents – and the practical factor – in the Allegro molto tempo, each such a fast succession of short diminuendoes, unless we combine them in one, two-bar long (which would have been certainly written differently), comes down to accents.

The markings in the remaining sources also indicate that attempts were made to unify them, although in the case of FC (→GE), the first two passages are provided with clearly longer marks than the subsequent ones. Those versions can be considered an acceptable interpretation of the notation of A.

Learn more »

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents, Inaccuracies in FE, Inaccuracies in FC

notation: Articulation, Accents, Hairpins

Missing markers on sources: A, FC, FE1, FE2, FED, FEJ, FES, FESch, GE1, GE2, GE3, EE1, EE2, EE1a