![](/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 : Annotations in teaching copies
b. 29
|
composition: Op. 25 No 3, Etude in F major
..
Chopin's intention in relation to category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FED , Authentic corrections in GC |
|||||||||
b. 40
|
composition: Op. 25 No 3, Etude in F major
..
In GC, FE and EE1, there are no naturals before the 1st semiquaver and 2nd quaver in the R.H. (g1 and d2). Both patent inaccuracies were corrected in GE, whereas in EE2 (→EE3) and FES, only the first of the signs was added, the category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Errors in FE , Accidentals in different octaves , Errors in EE , GE revisions , Annotations in FES , Errors of GC |
|||||||||
b. 69
|
composition: Op. 25 No 3, Etude in F major
..
Authenticity of the fingering written in FED, in spite of the fact that only a few first numerals reveal Chopin's handwriting, does not raise any doubts. However, the problem is constituted by the interpretation of its initial fragment – the e2 note seems to be provided with two different numerals, '1' over and '2' under. According to us, the upper numeral does not refer to this note, yet it is a part of the '31' fingering for the trill (3rd finger on g2, 1st on f2), which is detailed by the added bottom numerals, probably later. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources |