b. 35
|
composition: Op. 25 No 9, Etude in G♭ major
..
It is hard to evaluate which placement of the sign corresponds to the composer's intention. All three source versions can reflect the authentic notation, while the significant difference between FE and GC suggests that in the two lost manuscripts Chopin could have written the sign in two different places (the sign in GC is transcribed by the copyist). In the main text we suggest a variant solution, including the clearly varied versions of FE and GC (→GE). The bar is an example of a situation in which the pedal can be released in different places obtaining an equally good result and, moreover, the release of pedal can be performed gradually, which cannot be written with the help of the signs used by Chopin. Cf. the Etude in D major, No. 8, bars 19-20. category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||||||||||||||
b. 36
|
composition: Op. 25 No 9, Etude in G♭ major category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Authentic corrections in GC |
||||||||||||||||||||
b. 37-38
|
composition: Op. 25 No 9, Etude in G♭ major
..
In GC, the version beginning from G1 was written by Chopin instead of the original version of FE, beginning from the sixth. This undeniable improvement was also introduced in the base text to EE1, in which, however, it was reproduced inaccurately – both B1 at the beginning of the bar and the lack of tie sustaining d are most probably mistakes. In turn, EE1 includes a dot extending the des crotchet, overlooked in GC. This inaccuracy of the notation of GC was corrected only in GE3, which, thanks to this, is the only source in which the final version is written flawlessly. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Errors in EE , Terzverschreibung error , GE revisions , Accompaniment changes , Authentic corrections in GC |
||||||||||||||||||||
b. 37
|
composition: Op. 25 No 9, Etude in G♭ major
..
The concerning the bass G1 appears only in the sources including the later version of this bar – GC (→GE) and EE3 (in EE1 the indication was overlooked). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE inaccuracies |
||||||||||||||||||||
b. 37
|
composition: Op. 25 No 9, Etude in G♭ major
..
The notation of GC does not clearly show whether the indication is to be valid from the 2nd or 3rd quaver in the bar. It results from the fact of performing corrections in the L.H. and from the related to it insecurity whether to consider the relation of this sign to the part of the L.H. at all and if the answer is affirmative, whether to refer to the original version ( was written prior to the corrections) or to the final one. In the main text we give the sign in accordance with [A], reconstructed on the basis of the compatible version of GC prior to the correction and FE and EE. The versions of GE1 and GE2 (→GE3) constitute only possible interpretations of this notation, whereas only the second one can have a different meaning than the main text. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE |