Issues : Different values of chord components
|
b. 11
|
composition: Op. 10 No 8, Etude in F major
..
According to us, the authentic, simplified rhythmic notation of the 1st chord may be perceived as unclear in this case. Therefore, we introduce a more exact notation with division into voices. category imprint: Editorial revisions |
||||||||
|
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. 47-49
|
composition: Op. 10 No 8, Etude in F major
..
Various rhythmic values of the elements of the A1-A octave in bars 47 and 49, marked in details in A, were not reproduced in FE (→GE,EE). Most probably, it is a result of misunderstanding of the manuscript. However, it should be emphasised that the pedalling added in a proofreading of FE makes the longer detention of the upper note a purely technical action, without any impact on sound. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Different values of chord components , Inaccuracies in FE |
||||||||
|
b. 50
|
composition: Op. 10 No 8, Etude in F major
..
The engraver of FE probably assumed that lack of stem combining A and e is an example of inaccurate notation, quite often found in Chopin's autographs. In GE and EE the notation was simplified even more, omitting the point extending the bass note A. In the main text we give the precise notation of A. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Different values of chord components , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 77
|
composition: Op. 10 No 8, Etude in F major
..
In the main text we preserve the precisely differentiated duration of particular elements of the chord written in A. In FE (→GE,EE) the B category imprint: Differences between sources |
note was erroneously attributed the value of a semibreve.