Issues : Errors in EE
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next »
b. 29
|
composition: Op. 10 No 5, Etude in G♭ major
..
The cresc. indication was overlooked in EE2. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in EE |
|||||
b. 34-35
|
composition: Op. 10 No 5, Etude in G♭ major
..
It seems to be highly unlikely that Chopin, at the time of adding in a proofreading of FE (→GE), wanted to indicate the scope of validity of the forte dynamics from the place it was put by the engraver. According to us, there are two possible explanations:
In the main text we suggest a solution stemming from the first possibility, as being closer to the source notation. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in EE , Centrally placed marks |
|||||
b. 56
|
composition: Op. 10 No 5, Etude in G♭ major
..
In EE2 the raising d1 to d1 was omitted. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in EE |
|||||
b. 72-73
|
composition: Op. 10 No 5, Etude in G♭ major
..
Lack of the tie sustaining d2 in A is most probably Chopin's oversight. The tie was added in a proofreading of FE (inaccurately – the tie in bar 72 at the end of the line was omitted), it is also included in GE. The hold of this note is also indicated by the fingering added by Chopin in FED. In EE2 the tie was overlooked, which was corrected in EE3 (→EE4). category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , Errors in EE , Errors of A , Authentic corrections of FE |
|||||
b. 72
|
composition: Op. 10 No 5, Etude in G♭ major
..
category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in EE |
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next »