b. 24-25
|
composition: Op. 10 No 7, Etude in C major
..
The shorter slur of FE (→GE,EE) is almost certainly a result of misunderstanding of A – the right ending of the slur mingles with the mark. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE |
||||||
b. 24
|
composition: Op. 10 No 7, Etude in C major
..
In A there is no lowering a1 to a1 in the chord on the 2nd quaver of the bar. It is a patent error, comprehensible when we realise that first Chopin wrote the part of the R.H., probably in a half-bar long fragments, and then he wrote the part of the L.H. At the moment of writing the discussed chord, a as an element of the prevailing harmony was already grounded in his awareness. The accidental was added in FE (→GE,EE). category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Accidentals in different octaves , Errors of A , Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||
b. 24-25
|
composition: Op. 10 No 7, Etude in C major
..
We add cautionary naturals before f and F in the chords on the 2nd quaver. category imprint: Editorial revisions |
||||||
b. 25
|
composition: Op. 10 No 7, Etude in C major
..
FE has e1 as the lower note of the 1st semiquaver. This rather obvious from the pianistic point of view error was corrected in GE and EE. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions |
||||||
b. 25
|
composition: Op. 10 No 7, Etude in C major
..
Chopin added in FED. According to us, the annotation can be considered as an addition to the dynamic concept of this fragment written in A (→FE→GE,EE), therefore, independently from its possible change indicated in the same copy in bars 27-28. category imprint: Differences between sources |