



b. 8-9
|
composition: Op. 10 No 3, Etude in E major
..
Already at the stage of writing A, Chopin withdrew from the original version of the ending of the 1st eight-bar section, written in AI. However, it was only in FE (→GE,EE) that he gave the final shape to the performance indications of this fragment. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations |
||||||||
b. 8
|
composition: Op. 10 No 3, Etude in E major
..
In the main text, we give the fingering of the L.H. added by Chopin in a proofreading of FE (→GE). According to us, the fingering was meant to dissipate any possible doubts concerning the division between the hands – in this particular place moving the bottom voice of the R.H. to the bottom stave may suggest its performance by the L.H. The fingering is absent in EE, which may be an oversight of the engraver or a revision of Fontana, who focused on the R.H. (in bars 1-14 he provided fingering to almost every note in the R.H.). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||||
b. 8-9
|
composition: Op. 10 No 3, Etude in E major
..
The long accent over the d category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||||
b. 8
|
composition: Op. 10 No 4, Etude in C♯ minor
..
The random slurring of AI is simply a reflection of the working nature of this autograph. In the main text we give more detailed indications of FE (→GE,EE). Cf. the note on the rhythmic notation. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations |
||||||||
b. 8
|
composition: Op. 10 No 4, Etude in C♯ minor
..
The bottom voice is not marked in AI, which must be considered as a feature of a still immature notation and perhaps also a performance concept. It can be indicated by other dynamic indications – cf. notes in bars 7 and 8. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations |