|
b. 56
|
composition: Op. 25 No 7, Etude in C♯ minor
category imprint: Differences between sources |
|||||||||||||||||
|
b. 57-58
|
composition: Op. 25 No 7, Etude in C♯ minor
..
There are no grounds to consider the fingering of EE2 (→EE3) – otherwise very natural – to be authentic. The fifth finger on f category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in EE |
|||||||||||||||||
|
b. 58
|
composition: Op. 25 No 7, Etude in C♯ minor
..
In the main text we give the long accent, written in FES, in brackets as authentic and unobvious interpretation suggestion. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations |
|||||||||||||||||
|
b. 60-61
|
composition: Op. 25 No 7, Etude in C♯ minor
..
The ten. indications, appearing only in EE, are most probably authentic – cf. analogous bars 18-19, in which the indications appear only in FE and bars 42-43, in which they are in FE and GC (→GE). In the main text, we suggest them in the variant form (in brackets) due to their possible relation with the slurring, which appears in two different versions. category imprint: Differences between sources |
|||||||||||||||||
|
b. 60-62
|
composition: Op. 25 No 7, Etude in C♯ minor
..
Among numerous versions of phrasing of the part of the L.H. only two versions of slurring – FE and EE – may be considered as authentic and complete. GC is compatible with EE, however, it lacks the slur in bar 61, which is undoubtedly an inaccuracy; the slurring was then recreated in GE1, with a minor change in bar 62. In GE2 (→GE3), the missing slur in bar 61 was added, by beginning the slur in bar 62 earlier, which is an arbitrary revision. In the main text we give the unquestionable version of EE, while as an alternative version we suggest the clearly different version of FE, in which we replace the slur in bar 62, perhaps inaccurate, with the slur present in GC and EE. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions; Corrections & alterations issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions , Errors of GC |
in bar 58 is undoubtedly a mistake (it was meant to be the fourth).
