|
b. 31
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
FE1 overlooked a quaver flag to the 2nd R.H. octave, f-f1. The mistake was repeated in EE1, and also omitted were the dots prolonging the e category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Errors in EE , FE revisions , Errors repeated in EE |
||||||
|
b. 32
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
It cannot be safely said which version represents Chopin's final intention. In FE the R.H. rhythm does not contain a mistake, yet the way the notes are aligned (the R.H. with respect to the L.H.) suggests a different version of rhythm than the one resulting from the rhythmic values, i.e. the one we can observe in GE. As was the case with b. 29, it can be regarded as a mistake of the engraver or a possible correction of Chopin; however, in this case too, no visible traces of changes (traces of removal of the second pair of dots and of the third beam) are an argument against a correction. Therefore, in the main text we follow the unequivocal rhythm of GE, analogous to b. 28. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE |
||||||
|
b. 33
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
In FE1 the arpeggio mark (vertical slur) was placed after the octave (on its right-hand side). Such mistakes are not frequent, yet they can be seen in Chopin's first editions, cf., e.g. the Concerto in F minor, Op. 21, III mov., b. 172-173. In FE2 and EE1 a small tie combining the grace note with the bottom note of the following octave was added, which was almost certainly performed by the reviser. Both the slur and tie, forming an incomprehensible combination, were removed in EE2. The missing arpeggio in GE suggests that Chopin added it in the basis for FE or only just at the stage of proofreading that edition. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in GE , Arpeggio – vertical slur |
||||||
|
b. 33
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
GE1 features an erroneous R.H. rhythm on the 1st beat of the bar – a quaver, a semiquaver rest and a demisemiquaver. The mistake may be due to the value of the rest – addition of a dot results in a rhythm resembling the one present in GE in analog. b. 29 and in the same rhythm that can be found in b. 55. According to us, however, it is much more likely that it is the third beam that is a mistake – the e category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions |
||||||
|
b. 34
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
There is no category imprint: Interpretations within context |
-e
over 
in the sources, which is a patent inaccuracy, certainly repeated after [A]. The same applies to analogous b. 60 and 293.