![](/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)
Issues : Inaccuracies in FESB
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- Next »
b. 107-108
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
At the end of b. 107, it is uncertain which R.H. voices the slurs of A concern – practically, each combination of two out of three voices is possible. On the basis of a comparison with analogous b. 123, we assume that they concern the two bottom voices. This is how it was interpreted, more or less, in GE (→FE,EE), in which, however, the top slur begins only just over the last semiquaver, while the bottom one reaches d1 and not b category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FESB |
||||||||
b. 262
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
According to us, the placement of the category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Centrally placed marks , Inaccuracies in FESB |
||||||||
b. 335-336
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
The slurs of AsI are written offhandedly; they signal an intent rather than represent actual marks. This intent were most probably slurs encompassing the entire passage, including the 1st quaver in bar 336. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , Uncertain slur continuation , Inaccuracies in FESB |
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- Next »