b. 1-7
|
composition: Op. 10 No 9, Etude in F minor
..
The sources differ in the length of the initial phrase of the Etude, provided with the slurs in the L.H. As there is no doubt that the aforementioned slurs are written as a model and the similar slurring generally applies in the entire Etude, all these notations should be considered as equal. In the main text we give the version of A, as undoubtedly authentic and later than AI (in FE the missing slurs in bar 2 may be accidental). See also bars 8 and 9-16. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE |
|||||||||||
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 10 No 9, Etude in F minor
..
In the main text we consider the fingering of the R.H. added in FED. category imprint: Differences between sources |
|||||||||||
b. 1-9
|
composition: Op. 10 No 9, Etude in F minor
..
The fingering given by Chopin in A (→FE→GE) was repeated by Fontana in EE in the subsequent figures until bar 5. Fontana recalled this fingering also in bar 9. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
|||||||||||
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 10 No 9, Etude in F minor
..
In AI the indications and legatissimo are missing. In this kind of situation, when AI is the only source in which an indication or sign are missing, we do not give this version as an alternative to the versions of other sources. This manuscript had a private, working character and in such situations the missing indications must be considered only as a proof of the notation's underdevelopment. In the main text we give both indications in the place where Chopin put them in A. In FE (→GE,EE) legatissimo was placed between the staves, while – not until f1 in the R.H. category imprint: Differences between sources |
|||||||||||
b. 1-5
|
composition: Op. 10 No 9, Etude in F minor
..
AI is missing pedalling markings. category imprint: Differences between sources |