Issues : Centrally placed marks

b. 1

composition: Op. 10 No 1, Etude in C major

No indication in CLI

 in FE (→GE1GE2­→GE3­→GE4, →EE

Our suggestion (GE5)

..

The  indication in FE (→GE1GE2GE3GE4, →EE) seems to concern only the semiquavers in the R.H. According to us, as it is hard to suppose that the long resounding octaves in the L.H. were to be played in different dynamics, it should be assumed as an inaccuracy of the notation. A respective change was also introduced in GE5. See also bar 45.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Centrally placed marks

b. 35

composition: Op. 10 No 1, Etude in C major

No indication in CLI

 in FE (→GE,EE)

Our suggestion

..

In FE (→GE,EE) the  indication seems to be valid only from the semiquavers in the R.H. According to us, it is however highly unlikely for this indication not to include also the long resounding octave in the L.H. Therefore, we consider it as the notation's inaccuracy and in the main text we propose a relevant minor correction of the sign's placement. See also bar 45

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Centrally placed marks

b. 45

composition: Op. 10 No 1, Etude in C major

No marking in CLI

 in FE (→GE,EE)

Our suggestion

..

The  indication falls on the 2nd beat of the bar in the sources. It seems highly unlikely that Chopin wanted to indicate exactly this place as the moment of reaching the forte dynamics, therefore, in the main text we propose to put the sign at the beginning of the bar. Chopin probably used here an earlier notation rule, according to which the signs were not placed at the beginning of the area covered by them, but somewhere in the middle. This type of notation can sometimes be encountered in his works. Cf. e.g. the notation of A in Etude in G, Op. 10 No. 5, bar 83.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Centrally placed marks