



Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next »
b. 47-48
|
composition: Op. 10 No 6, Etude in E♭ minor
..
In A the category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE , EE inaccuracies |
|||||||
b. 50
|
composition: Op. 10 No 6, Etude in E♭ minor
..
The accent of A is, according to us, a long accent and it concerns the peak fragment of the semiquaver passage performed by the R.H. In the editions it took a form of a common short accent, concerning the crotchet in the L.H. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in FE |
|||||||
b. 50
|
composition: Op. 10 No 6, Etude in E♭ minor
..
We interpret two accents visible in A as long ones, as they do not differ from the remaining ones on this page of the manuscript. In FE (→GE,EE) only the upper accent was reproduced (as a short one). Due to the fact that the completeness of Chopin's proofreading of FE is dubious, we base the main text entirely on A. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Long accents |
|||||||
b. 53
|
composition: Op. 10 No 6, Etude in E♭ minor
..
The accent visible in A should be, according to us, interpreted as a long one. The mark of FE is ambiguous, which we interpret in favour of a common short accent. This is how it was interpreted in GE. In turn, EE gives a long accent (except for EE2 which is devoid of the mark). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents |
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next »