Issues : EE revisions
|
b. 47-49
|
composition: Op. 10 No 8, Etude in F major
..
The long accents, written in A in bars 47 and 49, were reproduced in FE (→GE) as short. It is certainly a result of misunderstanding of Chopin's notation. However, it is difficult to determine what made the engraver or reviser of EE use marks resembling long accents, contrary to the base text. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE |
||||||||||
|
b. 47
|
composition: Op. 10 No 8, Etude in F major
..
In this bar Chopin restarted the fingering indications in A, which he then completed while proofreading FE (→GE). Even more indications – added by Fontana – are to be found in EE. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||||||
|
b. 48
|
composition: Op. 10 No 8, Etude in F major
..
Change of the rhythmic value of the A-d fourth is an arbitrary decision of the reviser of GE2 (→GE3→GE4) and EE4. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |
||||||||||
|
b. 48
|
composition: Op. 10 No 8, Etude in F major
..
Out of three '1's Chopin wrote in A, only the first two were included in FE, which is probably a result of the engraver's oversight. In turn, two other digits added during a proofreading at the end of the bar certainly come from Chopin. Both in EE and in GE, the fingering adopted from FE was completed in the 3rd group of semiquavers. In the main text we suggest all certainly authentic digits included in A and FE. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||||||
|
b. 49
|
composition: Op. 10 No 8, Etude in F major
..
In A (→FE) there is no category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , GE revisions |
before the 4th semiquaver, which is a patent oversight. The sign was added in