b. 8
|
composition: Op. 25 No 2, Etude in F minor
..
The broader position of the L.H. written in AT was changed later by Chopin. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Accompaniment changes |
||||||||
b. 9
|
composition: Op. 25 No 2, Etude in F minor
..
The last crotchet in GE1 is an e1. The reason of this patent error could have been the unnaturally high position of this note in GC. The mistake was corrected in GE2 (→GE3). category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , Terzverschreibung error , GE revisions |
||||||||
b. 9
|
composition: Op. 25 No 2, Etude in F minor
..
The hairpins in EE may be a result of a mistake, as there is no similar sign in this place in any other source, neither in this nor in analogous bars. category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||
b. 9-10
|
composition: Op. 25 No 2, Etude in F minor
..
The slurs in bars 9-10 in AT may be interpreted in two ways. According to us, the divided slurs are much more likely here – while drawing the slur over bar 9, Chopin dragged the line too far, broke it and entered a new slur from the beginning of bar 10 (a similar situation occurred with the previous slur, starting from bar 7 and whose ending in bar 8 was, however, marked more clearly). category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Inaccurate slurs in A |
||||||||
b. 10-11
|
composition: Op. 25 No 2, Etude in F minor
..
All three ranges of the sign are most probably authentic. In the main text we give the hairpins on the basis of GC (→GE). The range of the sign in these sources is in the middle between the hairpins in AW and those in CDP, FE and EE. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins |