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=""
We give the time signature marking after AI, although theoretically, Chopin could have introduced in the lost [A]. According to us, it is, however, much more likely that it was an arbitrary change of the engraver of FE (→GE,EE), who did not use the
marking in the Etudes – contrary to the manuscripts – even once, cf. the Etudes in C major, No. 1, F major, No. 8 and C minor, No. 12. The phenomenon is also present in other pieces, even in the most obvious cases, e.g., in the Etudes in F minor, Op. 25 No. 2, D
major, Op. 25 No. 8 or F minor, Dbop. 36 No. 1.
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources
issues: Errors in FE, 4/4 or 2/2
notation: Rhythm