b. 8
|
composition: Op. 10 No 8, Etude in F major
..
In this context, lack of the slur over the semiquavers in the R.H. must be considered as Chopin's inaccuracy, which is justified by the revision introduced in EE4. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions |
||||||||
b. 8
|
composition: Op. 42, Waltz in A♭ major category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |
||||||||
b. 8
|
composition: Op. 10 No 10, Etude in A♭ major
..
The version of FE1 is a result of the engraver's mistake in determining the range of the octave sign, which ends one quaver too early in this edition. Both in FE2 and in EE the error was corrected. In GE this sixth, also written with an octave sign, is actually on the correct pitch, yet the octave sign erroneously includes also the next quaver. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Errors in GE , Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||||
b. 8
|
composition: Op. 10 No 10, Etude in A♭ major
..
The presence of the accent at the beginning of the bar in FE (→GE,EE) is probably a result of an inaccurately implemented Chopin's proofreading, in which all remaining accents on the 1st and 7th quavers in bars 5-8 were removed. However, it cannot be excluded that Chopin conserved this accent on purpose – to emphasise the local climax, provided in A with (cf. another note at the beginning of this bar). category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions |
||||||||
b. 8
|
composition: Op. 10 No 10, Etude in A♭ major
..
Omission of the mark written in A may be a mistake of the engraver of FE (→GE,EE) or a result of Chopin's proofreading. In the main text we give the version of editions, in which the level of dynamics between cresc. in bar 7 and dim. in the 2nd half of bar 8 is not precise. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Authentic corrections of FE |