|
b. 39-40
|
composition: Op. 10 No 3, Etude in E major
..
In A the fingering in bar 39 is incomplete – the digits are written only next to first three semiquavers and the bottom fourth note. Next to the top note, Chopin started writing '2', yet he did not finish it. It may mean that he resigned from repeating the fingering given in the previous bar or he stopped it and forgot to finish it. The additions introduced in FE (→GE,EE) seem to suggest the second possibility, yet the first also cannot be excluded, as Chopin could have simply changed his decision. In a proofreading of FE, the finger attributed to the bottom note at the beginning of bar 40 was also changed. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Authentic corrections of FE |
|||||||||
|
b. 40
|
composition: Op. 10 No 3, Etude in E major
..
In GE3 (→GE4→GE5) the fingering of last two semiquavers was misreproduced – 41 for the penultimate and a single 2 under the last one. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE |
|||||||||
|
b. 41
|
composition: Op. 10 No 3, Etude in E major
..
The natural lowering C category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions; Corrections & alterations |
|||||||||
|
b. 41-42
|
composition: Op. 10 No 3, Etude in E major
..
The majority of the digits of the fingering added in FES is not written with Chopin's hand, which, however, does not question the authenticity of these indications, yet it increases a possibility of potential errors (e.g. on the 4th semiquaver of the bar, the top '4' is definitely erroneous, most probably it was supposed to be a '1'). The fingering could have been dictated by the composer, yet taking into account the fact that this entire virtuoso fragment is deleted in FES, it seems to be more likely that it was rewritten from another pupils' copy. category imprint: Differences between sources |
|||||||||
|
b. 41-57
|
composition: Op. 10 No 3, Etude in E major
..
A single, short slur in bar 41 must be considered in A as an inaccuracy of notation – there is no continuation of the slur from the previous bar; there is also no reason to single out particularly this pair of semiquavers. According to us, it is a result of an unfinished change of slurring – at the beginning Chopin wrote in A four slurs 2 semiquavers each, starting from the second one in bar 41 and then, at the time of writing the octave sign, three out of these slurs were included in the line determining the range of the octave sign. However, he did not finish the correction, leaving the first slur unchanged and not entering the target slurring. Taking into account the structure of figurations and a few examples of extending the slurs in this Etude (e.g. in bars 2, 3, 21), we assume that Chopin most probably wanted to lead the slur from bar 40 until the beginning of bar 42. The arbitrarily added slurs of EE also draw attention, similar to the original slurs of A. Cf. the slur in the L.H. In AI there are no slurs in bar 41. However, we do not consider lack of this and many other performance indications on this page as an equal version of a given fragment, as the autograph is of a clearly working nature. In particular, when AI is not mentioned in the content of the note, it means that the discussed indication does not appear in it. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , Inaccurate slurs in A , Errors in GE |
in 
before C
