![](/build/images/logo_left-en.png)
![](/build/images/pl-button.5cab5de0.png)
![](/build/images/pomoc-button.d3d09842.png)
![](/build/images/pomoc-button-en.5098433b.png)
Issues : Inaccuracies in GE
b. 3
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 1, Mazurka in G minor
..
It is not clear whether the accent written in A was meant to be a short one or a long one. GE (→FE) has a short accent here, and the inaccurate placement of that mark in FE brought about its erroneous interpretation in EE. However, a comparison with the analogous bars 11, 51 and 59 points to the long accent option as being more probable. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , EE inaccuracies |
|||||||||||||||
b. 3-4
|
composition: Op. 10 No 12, Etude in C minor
..
We present the literal interpretation of the slurs included in A, however, there is no doubt that Chopin considered this notation to be equal to one slur, as in bars 1-2. A similar hesitation, concerning the choice of space for leading the slur, is visible also in bars 41-42. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccurate slurs in A , Authentic corrections of FE |
|||||||||||||||
b. 3
|
composition: Op. 25 No 1, Etude in A♭ major
..
Chopin added the dynamic indication in this bar only at the time of preparing the Etude for print. Initially, he provided the f2 note with an accent (as in bar 2), yet eventually he chose a pair of category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Deletions in A |
|||||||||||||||
b. 3
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
..
In FE, the f category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Errors in GE |
|||||||||||||||
b. 3
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 9, Prelude in E major
..
The moved and shorter category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in CGS |