b. 31
|
composition: Op. 10 No 8, Etude in F major
..
The version of A and GE is undoubtedly correct. The single-voice notation of FE (→EE3) is probably a result of a misunderstanding of the autograph's notation. The division into two voices without changing the rhythmic values is certainly a result of the revision of EE4 (similarly in bar 63). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions |
|||||||||||||
b. 32
|
composition: Op. 10 No 8, Etude in F major
category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE |
|||||||||||||
b. 33-34
|
composition: Op. 10 No 8, Etude in F major
..
It is hard to determine whether the slurs of FE (→GE,EE), separated contrary to the clear notation of A, are a result of Chopin's proofreading. Therefore, in the main text we give the undoubtedly authentic slur of A. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Authentic corrections of FE |
|||||||||||||
b. 33-34
|
composition: Op. 10 No 8, Etude in F major
..
In the main text we give the pedalling which Chopin added while proofreading FE (→EE). In GE1 the mark was omitted, which was added in subsequent GE,s, most probably on the basis of the authentic pedalling in bars 19-20. Lack of the mark in GE1 may be a simple oversight of the edition's engraver or be an echo of the error of the proof copy of FE, corrected in the last phase of proofreading. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE |
|||||||||||||
b. 33-35
|
composition: Op. 10 No 8, Etude in F major
..
In all editions, a few staccato dots next to A quavers were omitted. They are undoubtedly the engravers' inaccuracies. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , EE inaccuracies |