Issues : Authentic corrections of FE
b. 17
|
composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor
..
The crotchet in CLI is the original version (as in the previous bar). In this case Chopin shortened it to a quaver with rest both in Ap and FEcor (in FE1 only a rest was mistakenly added). category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||
b. 17
|
composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor
..
Our proposal (long accent) constitutes a resultant of undeniable elements of two sources including independently written indications in this place – Ap and FE (→GE,EE). We do not consider , as in the version for printing Chopin significantly reduced the number of these signs, while the type of the accent was determined by us on the basis of an entry made by Chopin himself in Ap. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||||
b. 18
|
composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor
..
In the main text we give the staccato dots written by Chopin in FEcor. The dots were omitted in FE (→EE) and in GE both octaves were combined with a slur. The authenticity of the latter is unclear – seeing the previous slurs, the reviser of GE could have considered the lack of slur over the last pair of crotchets as an oversight. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||||
b. 18
|
composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor
..
In the main text we give the length-wise harmonised pair of hairpins written by Chopin in FEcor. In Ap there is a striking imbalance between the half-bar-long hairpins and the sign, which looks like an accent. In the editions Chopin's indications were clearly extended. category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||
b. 19-21
|
composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor
..
In FEcor (FE→GE,EE) Chopin wrote the reminder about the upper voice's articulation twice – in bars 19 and 21. The hint in bar 19 is justified with the beginning of a new section of the piece, particularly in a situation when in bar 18 a group of semiquavers was embraced with a slur. In turn, the reason to repeat the indication in bar 21 was probably the beginning of a new page in FE, similarly as in bar 11. Cf. also the remark concerning dynamic markings. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Authentic corrections of FE |