Issues : GE revisions
b. 1-2
|
composition: Op. 10 No 10, Etude in A♭ major
..
It is unclear how to treat the short, two-quaver-long slurs visible in the sources. They do not raise any doubts in A, in which they are compatible with the accents over each sixth. However, after removal of the majority of accents in a proofreading of FE (→GE,EE), the slurs seem not to correspond to the new accentuation. The fact of leaving them could have been a compromise, whose aim was to avoid an additional, significant complication of a proofreading. On the other hand, it cannot be excluded that Chopin removed the accents in order not to change their layout, but to avoid exaggeration resulting from double indications. Therefore, having no absolute certainty of Chopin's intention, we suggest a version without slurs as a recommended alternative to the main text from A (→FE). category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |
||||||||||||||||||
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 10 No 4, Etude in C♯ minor
..
Chopin did not write the title of the piece in AI, although it is hard to believe that in August 1832, at the stage of completing the entire Op. 10, he could have even considered naming it differently than Etude. The conviction is not hampered by the fact that at the end of the editorial autograph of the Etude in E major, No. 3, Chopin uses the determination of tempo-character il presto con fuoco for the identification of the subsequent etude in the collection. In the main text we give the title and dedication in the undoubtedly authentic version adopted in FE. The extensions of both the title (in GE and EE) and the dedication (in EE) most probably come from the editors. See the Etude in C major, No. 1, bar 1. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Dedications , GE revisions |
||||||||||||||||||
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 10 No 3, Etude in E major
..
In the main text we give the title and dedication in the undoubtedly authentic version adopted in FE. The extensions of both the title (in GE and EE) and dedication (in EE) most probably come from the editors. See the Etude in C major, No. 1, bar 1. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Dedications , GE revisions |
||||||||||||||||||
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 25 No 1, Etude in A♭ major
..
In the main text we give the title and dedication in accordance with the title page of the entire opus in A (we develop the Mme and Csse abbreviations used in A) and FE. In A (→GE) and FE, the particular etudes are provided with an additional title, Etude, with a corresponding ordinal number, which we represent through the number preceding the score. In EE, the numbering includes 12 Etudes, Op. 10, hence this etude is No. 13. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Dedications , GE revisions , Deletions in A |
||||||||||||||||||
b. 1-2
|
composition: Op. 25 No 1, Etude in A♭ major
..
The long accent under f2 at the beginning of bar 2 in #AW is the original concept of dynamic markings in these bars. In A one can see that Chopin rejected the accent (placed above this note) in favour of a pair of hairpins. The hairpins were incorrectly reproduced in GE1 (→GE1a), yet only the fact of beginning diminuendo in GE2 (→GE3) from the beginning of bar 2 may be considered as a quite significant change. In FE and EE, diminuendo immediately follows crescendo. In the main text we reproduce the signs of A, the only ones written undoubtedly by Chopin's hand. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions , Deletions in A |