|
b. 105
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
In the main text we include the arpeggio visible in GE. The missing arpeggio in FE (→EE) could be explained by an oversight of the copyist or of the engraver; it could also have been entered into [A] after [FC] had already been finished (→FE). category imprint: Differences between sources |
|||||||
|
b. 105-112
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
These bars are absent in FE1, since in the only known copy coming from that impression, the leaf containing pages nos. 5-6 is missing (the leaf encompasses b. 105-168). In the notes concerning those bars – unless exceptional circumstances arise (requiring a commentary) – we assume that FE = FE2, i.e. FE1 did not differ from FE2. Such a circumstance could be, e.g. a difference between FE2 and EE1 which was based on a proof copy of FE2 not including the latest changes, and thus may convey the version of FE1. category imprint: Source & stylistic information issues: Incomplete sources |
|||||||
|
b. 106
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
The missing tie to the grace note in GE2 is most probably an oversight of the engraver. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE |
|||||||
|
b. 106
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
On the 3rd beat of the bar, in the main text we suggest supplementing the Chopinesque pedalling after analogous b. 60, 110 and 293. category imprint: Editorial revisions |
|||||||
|
b. 106-110
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
The trills in bars 106 and 110 are printed in GE without wavy lines after the we write trills with full wavy lines, since there are no doubts that this is how the markings present in the sources are to be understood – see the note in b. 10. category imprint: Differences between sources |
] suggested by the editors
in 
in