![](/build/images/logo_left-en.png)
![](/build/images/pl-button.5cab5de0.png)
![](/build/images/pomoc-button.d3d09842.png)
![](/build/images/pomoc-button-en.5098433b.png)
b. 170
|
composition: Op. 23, Ballade in G minor
..
In the sources, there is a category imprint: Editorial revisions issues: Cautionary accidentals |
|||||
b. 170-172
|
composition: Op. 23, Ballade in G minor
..
The deletions visible in A reveal that Chopin changed the bottom notes in the 1st crotchet in b. 170 and in the quavers ending b. 170-171. It is possible to read the deleted versions, which allows us to reproduce (with high probability) the earlier version of the R.H. part in b. 170-172: category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information issues: Corrections in A , Deletions in A |
|||||
b. 170
|
composition: Op. 23, Ballade in G minor
..
None of the sources includes a category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Omissions to cancel alteration , Errors resulting from corrections , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in FE , Errors repeated in EE |
|||||
b. 170-171
|
composition: Op. 23, Ballade in G minor
..
It is uncertain whether the missing staccato/portato dots in FE (→GE,EE) resulted from proofreading (performed by Chopin, who changed the concept concerning the articulation of the quintuplets in b. 170-171) or from an oversight by the engraver. Even if they were accidentally overlooked (which is indicated by the fact that there are no traces of removal of these marks in FE), Chopin did not consider it necessary to add them, neither while proofreading FE (twice) nor while working on the Ballade with Miss O'Meara (married name Dubois). Due to the above, in the main text we give the version of the principal source, i.e. FE2. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Authentic corrections of FE |
|||||
b. 170-172
|
composition: Op. 23, Ballade in G minor
..
The available photograph of A gives no certainty as to the form of the staccato markings over the octaves in the middle of each of these bars, i.e. whether they are wedges or dots. It seems that the marks in b. 171 and 172 are almost certainly wedges, which is also possible in the case of b. 170, which, however, was not reproduced by the editions. In the main text we keep the dots present in our principal source, FE2, in spite of the fact that the marks were chosen (not necessarily accurately) probably by the engraver of FE. This solution is supported by the editorial consistency with respect to the dots over the quintuplet crotchets in b. 170-171 along with the arguments presented therein and by the aforementioned uncertainty of the interpretation of A on the basis of an imperfect photograph. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Wedges , Inaccuracies in A |