data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/73ecd/73ecd80c88ad44c39f3711b6bcc33ca9e1021267" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/75013/75013441a15e45e6f391d55c49aaf803f3dff8a4" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/57140/571405c7057401412640722d57e0f4262876af22" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3075f/3075f31e8b155e01785c3a53896ad205598099cf" alt=""
b. 27-28
|
composition: Op. 10 No 9, Etude in F minor
..
Despite the difference in arrangement and number of indications, the character and flow of this phrase were not subject to any change, as it seems. The fact of having written category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Centrally placed marks |
||||||||
b. 27
|
composition: Op. 10 No 9, Etude in F minor
..
GE has an erroneous d category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , Terzverschreibung error |
||||||||
b. 28
|
composition: Op. 10 No 9, Etude in F minor
..
The earlier ending of the octave sign in FE (→GE) is a patent error, corrected by Chopin in FED and FES. Both autographs, as well as EE, have the correct text. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Errors in FE , Annotations in FED , Annotations in FES |
||||||||
b. 28
|
composition: Op. 10 No 9, Etude in F minor
..
According to us, lack of the category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE |
||||||||
b. 29-32
|
composition: Op. 10 No 9, Etude in F minor
..
The fingering in the L.H. in bars 29-31 was added by Chopin in a proofreading of FE (→GE,EE). In EE the indications of bar 31 were also repeated in bar 32. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE |