



b. 44
|
composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor
..
The single crotchet in CLI is undoubtedly the original version. In Ap and FE (→GE,EE) Chopin took the decision to insert a quaver octave here (in analogous bar 17 a single D was left), which may have been related to an increased sound volume in the last section of the Etude. Cf. a further remark in this bar. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Accompaniment changes |
||||||||
b. 44
|
composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor
..
The version of CLI without the Neapolitan chord was changed by Chopin in Ap, yet not in the base text for FE (differently as in analogous bar 17). Only in FEcor Chopin added the flats lowering b to b category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Accompaniment changes |
||||||||
b. 44
|
composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor
..
The single e crotchet in Ap is probably a later version than the e-h fifth in CLI. However, Chopin conserved the fifth in the base text for FE and confirmed his decision by adding in FEcor a category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Chopin's hesitations , Accompaniment changes |
||||||||
b. 44
|
composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor
..
Same as in analogous bar 17, the value of a quaver in Ap is a variant present only in this manuscript. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Chopin's hesitations |
||||||||
b. 44
|
composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor
..
According to us, the mark written by Chopin in FEcor is a long accent, same as in analogous bar 17. An unequivocal long accent is also in Ap. In FE (→GE1→GE2) the mark was interpreted as category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Errors in EE , Errors in GE |