Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next »
b. 48-49
|
composition: Op. 10 No 11, Etude in E♭ major
..
In the main text we give the range of hairpins after A, as the minor shifts, to which they were subject in the editions, each time result from an inaccurate interpretation of the base text. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins |
||||||||
b. 50-51
|
composition: Op. 10 No 11, Etude in E♭ major
..
In the main text we give the pairs of dynamic hairpins after A. We interpret the very short marks at the end of the bars, resembling accents, as diminuendos due to the analogy with motifs in bars 1-2 and analog. In the editions only the marks were considered, which, according to us, is an arbitrary decision of the engraver of FE, stemming from a misunderstanding of the manuscript. The range of these marks were subject to further distortions in GE (minimal) and EE. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins |
||||||||
b. 50
|
composition: Op. 10 No 11, Etude in E♭ major
..
In the main text we give the long accent written in A (→FE). In GE it was reproduced as a common short accent and in EE it was omitted. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , Errors in EE |
||||||||
b. 51
|
composition: Op. 10 No 11, Etude in E♭ major
..
Most probably the accent was omitted in the editions accidentally. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in FE |
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next »