Issues : Errors in FE
|
b. 12-13
|
composition: Op. 10 No 8, Etude in F major
..
Chopin's fingering of these bars had been already indicated in A, although the end of bar 12 is imprecisely described – the 4th finger on the 14th note does not follow from the previous arrangement of the hand. In a proofreading of FE (→GE,EE), Chopin added a relevant digit, however, it is uncertain whether he can be attributed the previous deletion of two '1's, over the 1st and 13th semiquavers. Considering the engraver's negligence to be a more plausible reason for their omission, in the main text we give all digits featured in A and FE. Both in EE and – which is much less frequent in the Etudes – in GE the indications of FE were completed at the beginning of bar 12, using Chopin's fingering of an analogous figure in bar 11. In EE the fingering of the 1st group of semiquavers in bar 13 was also completed. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Errors in GE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||||
|
b. 19-23
|
composition: Op. 10 No 8, Etude in F major
..
The slurs in A, despite being added in fragments, were undoubtedly meant to create one continuous slur, running from the beginning of bar 16 to the middle of bar 23. However, in FE (→GE,EE), the slurs between bars 19 and 20 are clearly separated. Moreover, nothing indicates that the omitted in FE (→GE1) continuation of the slur in bar 21, certainly by inattention, was to be connected with the slur beginning in bar 22 (in EE and subsequent GE,s the slur in bar 20 ends on the last note). It is hard to attribute this discrepancy only to the engraver's distraction, on the other hand, it is uncertain what a possible Chopin's proofreading of slurs considered, whether the composer actually wanted to resign from one slur and divide it into two-bar phrases. In this situation, in the main text we give the certainly authentic slurring of A, subject to the fact that Chopin's latest decision could have been the divided slurs of the editions. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||||
|
b. 26
|
composition: Op. 10 No 8, Etude in F major
..
Adding c to the remaining elements of the chord is almost certainly a result of a misunderstanding of the notation of A by the engraver of FE (→GE,EE). category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||
|
b. 29-31
|
composition: Op. 10 No 8, Etude in F major
..
In FE (→EE), the staccato dots in bar 31 were overlooked. The mistake was corrected in GE1, yet in subsequent GE,s, again one dot in each of these two bars was omitted. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Errors in GE , GE revisions |
||||||||
|
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 |
