Issues : EE revisions
|
b. 52-53
|
composition: Op. 10 No 10, Etude in A♭ major
..
Same as in bars 50-51, we consider the omission of the tie by the engraver of FE to be more plausible than Chopin's possible proofreading of FE. However, in this place a tie was added both in GE and EE. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions |
|||||
|
b. 54-55
|
composition: Op. 10 No 10, Etude in A♭ major
..
In bar 54 Fontana carefully fingered the entire passage of the L.H., in a way which was probably in Chopin's mind (which results from the natural position of the hand). In turn, in bar 55 he gave fingering of the figuration which differs from the one from bars 1-2 only in the bass notes, which does not have any influence on the fingering. See also the note on the R.H. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
|||||
|
b. 55
|
composition: Op. 10 No 10, Etude in A♭ major
..
While completing the fingering in EE, Fontana generally repeated his indications from bar 1, modeled on the ones by Chopin. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
|||||
|
b. 57-58
|
composition: Op. 10 No 10, Etude in A♭ major
..
The slurs in the L.H. added in EE4 are certainly non-authentic. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
|||||
|
b. 63-64
|
composition: Op. 10 No 10, Etude in A♭ major
..
The fingering, added by Fontana in EE, generally results from Chopin's previous hints (in bars 28 and 45). The fact of copying the use of the 5th finger on d category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
3 at the end of bar 63 seems to be unnecessary, as it is not the only comfortable possibility in this place.