![](/build/images/logo_left-en.png)
![](/build/images/pl-button.5cab5de0.png)
![](/build/images/pomoc-button.d3d09842.png)
![](/build/images/pomoc-button-en.5098433b.png)
Issues : Inaccuracies in FE
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next »
b. 34
|
composition: Op. 10 No 4, Etude in C♯ minor
..
category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Inaccuracies in FE , fz – f |
||||||||
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. 46
|
composition: Op. 10 No 4, Etude in C♯ minor
..
According to us, the category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE |
||||||||
b. 54
|
composition: Op. 10 No 4, Etude in C♯ minor
..
A possible error of the engraver of FE (→GE,EE) is indicated by the repeated category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Inaccuracies in FE , fz – f |
||||||||
b. 69-70
|
composition: Op. 10 No 4, Etude in C♯ minor
..
The fact of beginning the slur from the 2nd group of semiquavers is almost certainly an inaccuracy of notation, which probably follows from [A]. Different versions of the slur's ending in EE and GE2 (→GE3) are certainly a result of the engravers' errors. The omission of the slur in GE4 (→GE5) may be considered as an oversight or revision. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Errors in GE , GE revisions , EE inaccuracies |
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next »