Issues : EE revisions
b. 43
|
composition: Op. 23, Ballade in G minor
..
In this place, the accent of A is clearly longer than the remaining ones, which was even reproduced by FE. In spite of that, in the main text we suggest a short accent, since we assume that an accidental inaccuracy is more likely. The vertical accent of EE is an arbitrary change, compliant with the manner of that edition – cf. b. 41-43. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in A |
||||||||
b. 44
|
composition: Op. 23, Ballade in G minor
..
EE added a cautionary to c1 on the 2nd crotchet in the bar. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
||||||||
b. 45-46
|
composition: Op. 23, Ballade in G minor
..
The first of the two R.H. slurs beginning in b. 46 is written in A with a flourish, as a result of which in FE (→GE,EE) it erroneously starts from the 1st crotchet in the bar. It prompted the reviser of EE to shorten the preceding slur, which encompasses only b. 45 in this edition. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , Inaccurate slurs in A |
||||||||
b. 45-47
|
composition: Op. 23, Ballade in G minor
..
In A (→FE,EE1), there is no accidental to f1(2), the 1st quaver in b. 45 and 47. It made the reviser of GE, and then also of EE2 (→EE3), to consider it Chopin's mistake and to add a to each of those notes. To avoid any doubts, in the main text we add cautionary naturals to them, in spite of the fact that there are no f notes in the preceding bars. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , GE revisions , Cautionary accidentals |
||||||||
b. 63
|
composition: Op. 23, Ballade in G minor
..
The b1 note in FE1 must be a mistake of the engraver, corrected in FE2 (probably by Chopin). The correct version in GE and EE may mean that it was also the bases for these editions that included Chopinesque corrections; however, it is uncertain, since such a mistake could have been detected by the reviser thanks to the very regular structure of the passages of this section. In A, one can see another deleted note between the f1 and d2 quavers, most probably b1. The gaps between the notes in the entire group suggest that it was not replaced by d2, but removed from the initial version of the passage, which probably did not include the 2nd quaver, d1: . category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Corrections in A , Terzverschreibung error , GE revisions , Deletions in A , Authentic corrections of FE , Main-line changes |