b. 65-67
|
composition: Op. 10 No 5, Etude in G♭ major
..
According to us, the slur of A is inaccurately written on both sides (too short). In FE (→GE,EE) the beginning of the slur was correctly interpreted, whereby the end was left according to the classic rule of not exceeding the bar line. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Inaccurate slurs in A |
||||||||
b. 65
|
composition: Op. 10 No 5, Etude in G♭ major
category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||
b. 66
|
composition: Op. 10 No 5, Etude in G♭ major
..
Lack of the mark must be considered as Chopin's oversight. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , No pedal release mark , Inaccuracies in A |
||||||||
b. 66
|
composition: Op. 10 No 5, Etude in G♭ major
..
Chopin prolonged the sound of c1, while proofreading FE (→GE,EE). It is a continuation of the change whose traces are visible in A – initially the entire five-note chord was written in crotchets. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||||
b. 67-74
|
composition: Op. 10 No 5, Etude in G♭ major
..
In the version prepared for printing Chopin did not include fingering in these bars, most probably assuming that the performers, remembering very similar combinations fingered in bars 17-22, would easily find the fingering which naturally stems from the figuration's shape. The hint written in FED in bar 72 concerns one figure which does not have its equivalent in the 1st section of the Etude. In EE Fontana added in these bars fingering based on authentic indications in bars 17-22. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |