|
b. 7
|
composition: Op. 25 No 9, Etude in G♭ major
category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||
|
b. 7
|
composition: Op. 26 No 1, Polonaise in C♯ minor
..
GE4 (→GE5) arbitrarily added cautionary category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 7-8
|
composition: Op. 25 No 11, Etude in A minor
..
The slur of GC, contrary to FE and EE, as well as to the natural shape of the phrase – cf. bar 5 and analog. – is certainly inaccurate. Imprecise, even clearly erroneous slurs are relatively frequent in Gutmann's copies (cf., e.g., bar 9). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Inaccuracies in GC |
||||||||
|
b. 7
|
composition: Op. 26 No 1, Polonaise in C♯ minor
..
In GE2 (→GE3→GE4→GE5) the beginning of the slur was arbitrarily moved over the 1st note of the bar, where the previous slur simultaneously ends. Similarly in bar 32. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 7-10
|
composition: Op. 25 No 10, Etude in B minor
..
Three out of four accents in GC are undoubtedly long accents, the fourth one (in bar 8) may be interpreted as either long or short. In GE they were reproduced as short. EE includes distinct long accents in all these bars, FE – only in bars 9-10, yet the one in bar 7 may also be considered as long. Therefore, it seems that the use of long accents by Chopin is much more likely here. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Long accents |
for e in the L.H. (only the first time) and e2 in the R.H. (in both situations).
