Issues : fz – f
b. 12
|
composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor
..
The sign in FE (→GE,EE), unjustified in this context (cf. analogous bars 4 and 39), is probably a result of an overlap of two mistakes:
Due to these reasons we omit this in the main text. Cf. bar 27. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , fz – f |
||||||||
b. 13
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major
..
Change of to is a quite common mistake in the first editions of Chopin's pieces – cf. e.g. the Etude in C Minor, Op. 10 No. 4, bar 1. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , fz – f |
||||||||
b. 16-18
|
composition: Op. 10 No 4, Etude in C♯ minor
..
The error of FE (→GE,EE) in bar 16 is undeniable:
In all the aforementioned bars AI has only accents, without additional indications. Cf. bars 20-22. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE , fz – f |
||||||||
b. 17
|
composition: Op. 10 No 3, Etude in E major
..
The way in which the indication is written in A makes a misinterpretation highly likely. Due to this fact, in the main text we give preference to this version. Apart of the change of to in FE (→GE,EE), the ten. indication for the chord in the L.H. was omitted (the indication for the R.H. was reproduced in accordance with A), which reinforces the conviction about the engraver's inattention. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE , fz – f |
||||||||
b. 19
|
composition: Op. 25 No 8, Etude in D♭ major
..
The type of the sign indicating the local culmination and its exact placement raise some doubts here:
In the main text we suggest a as a result of Chopin's possible correction, placed in accordance with the musical sense at the beginning of the bar. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: fz – f , Centrally placed marks |