b. 18-20
|
composition: Op. 10 No 7, Etude in C major
..
The type of accents in bars 18 and 20 (short or long) is not clear in FE – in GE they were reproduced as short, while in EE as long. We adopt that, same as in A, they are long accents. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE |
||||||
b. 19
|
composition: Op. 10 No 7, Etude in C major
..
Lack of the staccato mark in the middle of bar 19 in A (→FE) should rather be considered to be an inaccuracy. On the other hand, it is not certain which of the signs that appear in this fragment – dot or wedge – would have been used by Chopin if he had noticed this deficiency. In the main text we give preference to the wedge, as Chopin added this sign, while proofreading similar bar 17 in FE. The signs were added by the revisers of GE and EE – wedge in GE1, dot in EE and subsequent GE,s. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |
||||||
b. 19
|
composition: Op. 10 No 7, Etude in C major
..
According to us, lack of dynamic indications in this place may have been a result of Chopin's distraction, as similar motifs were equally marked both earlier (bar 17) and later (bars 21 and 23). category imprint: Editorial revisions |
||||||
b. 20
|
composition: Op. 10 No 7, Etude in C major
..
It is hard to determine whether omitting the mark in the editions is a result of Chopin's proofreading or the engraver's inaccuracy. In the main text we suggest a variant solution. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE |
||||||
b. 21
|
composition: Op. 10 No 7, Etude in C major
..
Lack of the staccato dot under the 1st quaver in A (→FE→EE) must be considered as an oversight – cf. bar 23. The mark was added in GE. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |