|
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 25 No 2, Etude in F minor
..
In the main text we include the molto legato indication in bar 1 (in accordance with GC), yet between the staves, as it is in FE and EE, out of which one was most probably based on [A]. This is how we perhaps recreate the notation of [A], as such an arrangement was impossible to be recreated in the sources based on this autograph in a graphically satisfying manner. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations |
||||||||||||||
|
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 25 No 2, Etude in F minor
..
According to us, the c2 quaver in AW may be a mistake, resulting from transition to two times bigger rhythmic values. The corresponding it rest in the part of the L.H. is illegible on the preserved photography of AW – for reasons of simplification, we assume it is a quaver rest. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations |
||||||||||||||
|
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 25 No 2, Etude in F minor
..
The version of CDP may be a mistake – the copyist could have, e.g., misinterpret the extension of the phrase slur in [A]. However, it cannot be excluded that it is an authentic version, as the slur could have been included in [A], where Chopin deleted it afterwards. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Chopin's hesitations |
||||||||||||||
|
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 25 No 2, Etude in F minor
..
In the printed version Chopin did not give the fingering. In the main text, we, however, include the abundant indications in this respect, given in AW and entered during lessons into FED and FES. The complementary fingering versions are discussed in one note, whereas these that can be considered independently are included in separate notes. category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||||||||
|
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 25 No 2, Etude in F minor
category imprint: Differences between sources |
