|
b. 15
|
composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor
..
In the lower voice CLI has the d3-e3 second. This original version was not entirely forgotten by Chopin during proofreading of FE, which is proved by adding and then deleting e3 in FEcor. Cf. bar 42. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Chopin's hesitations , Accompaniment changes |
||||||||
|
b. 15-16
|
composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor
..
The pair of category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||
|
b. 15-17
|
composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor
..
In the main text we give the dynamic markings written in FEcor, in accordance with the visible in this Etude Chopin's tendency to indicate only general framework of dynamic details. However, the more precise indications of Ap may be, according to us, treated as their completion. In FE (→GE,EE) the dim. indication, written in FEcor in the middle of bar 17, was reproduced a little bit later, on the 3rd beat of the bar. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||||
|
b. 15
|
composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor
..
In CLI the entire bar is written one octave lower. In the manuscripts also the adjacent bars are entirely written one octave lower, yet both bar 14 and 16 are included under an octave sign. Therefore, there is no doubt that bar 15 was also meant to be marked like that. The copyist must have totally lost it, as at the beginning of bar 15 he even wrote loco, with which an end of the octave sign was designated back then, while in bar 16 he started a new indication. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Errors of CLI |
||||||||
|
b. 16-18
|
composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor
category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Chopin's hesitations , Accompaniment changes |
hairpins in 
