|
b. 30
|
composition: Op. 25 No 1, Etude in A♭ major
..
In this bar, last on the page, in AI there are no pedalling marks. It is certainly an oversight. category imprint: Differences between sources |
|||||||||
|
b. 31-38
|
composition: Op. 25 No 1, Etude in A♭ major
..
From bar 35 to the end of the Etude, Chopin, in both autographs – AI and A – used an abbreviated notation of the repeating figures on a number of occasions (cf., e.g. bars 1-8 and 9-18). Interestingly enough, the notation of AI is more precise, as it includes the differences in the size of the note heads. We consider the notation of A in bars 35 and 36 to be inaccurate in this respect. The abbreviation used in CDP in bar 31 is most probably an arbitrary decision of the copyist. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Abbreviated notation of A |
|||||||||
|
b. 32-33
|
composition: Op. 25 No 1, Etude in A♭ major
..
In the original version, written in AI, the bottom notes of the figuration in the R.H. doubled the melodic line – (e
In GE1 (→GE2), the 4th semiquaver in bar 33 is an f1 instead of d category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Errors in GE , Terzverschreibung error , GE revisions , Deletions in A , Accompaniment changes |
|||||||||
|
b. 32-34
|
composition: Op. 25 No 1, Etude in A♭ major
..
The cresc. indication was added in A most probably only in the last phase of preparation of the Etude for print, as it was not included in CDP (similarly as appassionato in bar 34). In FE and EE, cresc. appears slightly later, while in FE it is preceded by a category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations |
|||||||||
|
b. 32
|
composition: Op. 25 No 1, Etude in A♭ major
..
In the version prepared for print Chopin did not include this accent, similarly as many others – cf., e.g., bars 1-2, 4, 17. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations |
1-f1-f1 in 
in 
