b. 7
|
composition: Op. 10 No 3, Etude in E major
category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE |
||||||||||||
b. 7
|
composition: Op. 10 No 3, Etude in E major
..
The accent in the 1st half of this bar may be interpreted as short or long in A. The second possibility is indicated by the even shorter accent in the L.H. in the 2nd half of the bar and by the melodic context. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Long accents |
||||||||||||
b. 7
|
composition: Op. 10 No 3, Etude in E major
..
The accent in the 1st half of the bar may be interpreted as long or short in A. A clearly longer sign is written also in AI. On the other hand, a comparison with analogous accents in the 2nd half of this bar and in bars 1-2 suggests the second possibility and this is how the sign was understood in FE (→GE,EE). According to us, the context, particularly the harmonic one, can justify distinguishing this note with a longer accent. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness issues: Long accents |
||||||||||||
b. 7
|
composition: Op. 10 No 3, Etude in E major category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |
||||||||||||
b. 8
|
composition: Op. 10 No 3, Etude in E major
..
In the main text we include the fingering added by Chopin in FED and the slur, embracing this group of semiquavers in A. In EE Fontana gave the identical fingering, marked in a more accurate manner. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Annotations in FED |