|
b. 37-38
|
composition: Op. 10 No 4, Etude in C♯ minor
..
Lack of accents in AI is only a simplification of notation – the accents from bar 33 most probably are valid also here. Cf. bar 34. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations |
||||||||
|
b. 37-38
|
composition: Op. 10 No 4, Etude in C♯ minor
..
In AI the last group of semiquavers in bar 37 and last three in bar 38 are not written out with notes and only marked as repetition of the previous ones. category imprint: Source & stylistic information issues: Abbreviated notation of A |
||||||||
|
b. 38
|
composition: Op. 10 No 4, Etude in C♯ minor
..
It is hard to assume that the omission of the crescendo mark or verbal indication was intended here by Chopin – cf. the analogous phrase in bars 33-34. Therefore, in the main text we suggest the category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE |
||||||||
|
b. 38
|
composition: Op. 10 No 4, Etude in C♯ minor
..
In the main text we suggest adding a long accent after the analogous phrase in bars 33-34. category imprint: Editorial revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 38
|
composition: Op. 10 No 4, Etude in C♯ minor
..
In this case, the missing slur seems to be an inaccuracy of the notation of AI and FE (→EE2) – cf. the analogous slur in bars 34-35. The notation of bar 38 shows a number of possible potential inaccuracies of FE in the indications of dynamic nature (cf. the notes on the category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |
in 
