|
b. 3
|
composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major
..
The version of JC and EF, with a clearly audible doubled leading note B-b on the 5th quaver of the bar, is undoubtedly earlier. It is difficult to determine how the difference concerning sustaining the g note at the transition between bars 3 and 4 was developed. In PE, the lower note of the last semiquaver was printed on the level of c1, which is certainly a mistake corrected by us into d1. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Main-line changes |
||||||||
|
b. 3
|
composition: Op. 10 No 1, Etude in C major
category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors of CLI |
||||||||
|
b. 3
|
composition: Op. 10 No 1, Etude in C major
..
The fingering given in the main text, drawn from FE (→GE), is certainly authentic. In EE it was completed with digits added by Fontana, which, in this case, describes an alternative fingering. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 3-4
|
composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor
..
In Ap the rhythmic values of subsequent two-note chords of the lower voice in the R.H. create in those bars (as well as in subsequent repetitions) an alternating short-long scheme (semiquaver-crotchet). Sometimes the resounding length contrast is additionally underlined with accents. In the main text we give the homogenous, as far as the sound is concerned, version of FE (→GE,EE). category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Chopin's hesitations , Accompaniment changes |
||||||||
|
b. 3
|
composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor
..
It is not clear how to understand the signs shaped in the form of accents visible in Ap at the end of bars 3 and 4. Therefore, in both places we offer alternative interpretations. A similar problem appears in analogous bars 11-12, 38 and 39. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Long accents |
in 