|
b. 5
|
composition: Op. 10 No 1, Etude in C major
..
The slur added in EE3 (→EE4) is probably an arbitrary addition of the reviser of EE, who took into consideration the authentic slur in analogous bars 53-54. Situations, in which analogous places differ in performance indications, are very common in Chopin's pieces. It does not always mean that Chopin wanted to underline the diversity of their performance (e.g., in this case non legato in bars 5-6 and legato in bars 53-54). The lack of a slur may be considered here as a suggestion of a smoother, more homogenous phrasing of the entire eight-bar section. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 5-6
|
composition: Op. 10 No 1, Etude in C major
..
In CLI the G1-G octave in bar 5 is a semibreve, while the D1-D octave in bar 6 – a minim. It seems to be highly unlikely for this obvious error to be included in [AI]. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Rhythmic errors , Errors of CLI |
||||||||
|
b. 5
|
composition: Op. 10 No 1, Etude in C major
..
In the main text we give the undoubtedly authentic fingering of FE (→GE). In EE it was completed with a digit added by Fontana, which indicates a different fingering than the one by Chopin. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 5-6
|
composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor
..
In EE Fontana added here the fingering which was the literal repetition of Chopin's indication for the upper voice in bars 1-2. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 5
|
composition: Op. 10 No 12, Etude in C minor
..
In the main text we suggest a possibility of adding category imprint: Differences between sources |
in 
