Issues : Errors in EE
|
b. 1-2
|
composition: Op. 10 No 1, Etude in C major
..
In both known copies of EE2, the omitted accents were added by hand. They were also added in the later impressions of EE. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in EE |
|||||
|
b. 5
|
composition: Op. 10 No 1, Etude in C major
..
The b3 note on the last semiquaver of CLI and EE could be easily considered as a mistake except for the fact that in analogous bar 53 the sources have the same text. Therefore, it cannot be excluded that in CLI we are dealing with the original version, while in EE with the editor's revision. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in EE , Main-line changes , Errors of CLI |
|||||
|
b. 27-28
|
composition: Op. 10 No 1, Etude in C major
..
In EE2 there are no ties sustaining the G1-G octave, which is almost certainly a mistake (cf. bars 30-31). See the previous remark. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in EE |
|||||
|
b. 27-37
|
composition: Op. 10 No 1, Etude in C major
..
In the main text we give the undoubtedly authentic pedalling of FE (→GE,EE). (In GE3 the category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in EE , Errors in GE |
|||||
|
b. 30-31
|
composition: Op. 10 No 1, Etude in C major
..
In EE2 the octaves in the L.H. in these bars are linked with ties. It is probably a mistake – the ties were supposed to be put one line above as ties sustaining the G1-G octave in bars 27-28. The assumption is confirmed by a joint review of both places in EE3 (→EE4): the ties in bars 30-31 were removed and added in bars 27-28. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in EE |
sign was mistakenly omitted in bars 29 and 31, while in 
