|
b. 48-49
|
composition: Op. 25 No 1, Etude in A♭ major
..
Chopin could have added the slur in the L.H. while proofreading FE. This kind of revision is highly unlikely in this edition. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Authentic corrections of FE |
|||||
|
b. 48-49
|
composition: Op. 25 No 1, Etude in A♭ major
..
Interpretation of the written in pencil ending of the Etude is impeded in AI by limited resolution of the preserved photography. Originally, the piece ends in bar 48: category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Changed phrase length |
|||||
|
b. 48
|
composition: Op. 25 No 1, Etude in A♭ major
..
The wavy line in the indication of the trill, in spite of being entirely clear in A, was not included in any of the sources. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE |
|||||
|
b. 48-49
|
composition: Op. 25 No 1, Etude in A♭ major
..
In AI there are no pedalling marks in these bars. The absence of category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: No pedal release mark |
|||||
|
b. 48-49
|
composition: Op. 25 No 1, Etude in A♭ major
..
The slur of FE, most probably erroneous, could have corresponded, to a certain extent, to the notation of the base text – written with panache, reaching far beyond the rests slurs are not infrequent in Chopin's autographs (e.g., in the Mazurka in G minor, Op. 24 No. 1, bars 16 and 18), not to mention Gutmann's copies (e.g., in the Scherzo in C category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE |
. Chopin then added in pencil an additional bar, yet interpretation of the details of the part of the L.H., which seems to be edited differently than in 
cancelling the pedal taken at the beginning of bar 44 is not surprising in the original, shorter version of the ending (see another note to bars 
minor, Op. 39,