b. 29
|
composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor
..
The unequivocal long accent, written by Chopin in FEcor, was erroneously recreated as a diminuendo mark in FE (→GE,EE). Although the hairpins are also in Ap, there is no at the beginning of bar 30 there. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in FE |
||||||||
b. 29
|
composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor
..
This is the second of the places in which Chopin changed the melodic line of the Etude (cf. bar 28). The final version is present in Ap, it was also already written in the base text for FE. In one of the last proofreadings of FE (→EE) a cautionary was added before the 14th semiquaver a1. In this context the sign seems to be totally unnecessary. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Cautionary accidentals , Authentic corrections of FE , Main-line changes |
||||||||
b. 29
|
composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor
..
The semibreve in CLI is undoubtedly the original version. In the final version Chopin enriched the sound and made the rhythm more robust. In Ap before the lower note of the first octave is missing. In Ap and FE there is no lowering e1 to e1 on the 2nd beat of the bar. This patent inaccuracy was corrected in GE and EE. In GE3 and EE4 an unnecessary before the 2nd e is also added. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , Accompaniment changes |
||||||||
b. 29-30
|
composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor
..
The slurs combining the E-e octave with the next one were added by Chopin in one of the last proofreadings of FE (→GE,EE). In Ap the octaves are also combined, yet only with the upper slur. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||||
b. 29
|
composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Errors in EE |