Issues : GE revisions
b. 104
|
composition: Op. 25 No 10, Etude in B minor category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Changes of metre , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , 4/4 or 2/2 |
||||||
b. 104
|
composition: Op. 25 No 10, Etude in B minor
..
The first slur in the R.H., in GC started too early and moved to the left, confused the engraver of GE1 who combined it with the previous one. The remaining inaccurate slurs of GC in this bar were interpreted correctly, in accordance with the version of the remaining sources. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions , Inaccuracies in GC |
||||||
b. 107-108
|
composition: Op. 25 No 10, Etude in B minor
..
Same as in bars 5-6, stating which kind of accents Chopin had on his mind poses a difficult challenge. In GC, FE and EE the last accent in bar 108 is clearly shorter than the previous (and next) and this is the version we give in the main text. The harmonised notation of GE1 and GE2 (→GE3) may be, however, considered as justified alternative versions of these signs. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Long accents , GE revisions |
||||||
b. 108
|
composition: Op. 25 No 10, Etude in B minor
..
FE has an a1 as the 3rd crotchet of the middle voice in the R.H. It is almost certainly the so-called Terzverschreibung error. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Omissions to cancel alteration , Errors in GE , Terzverschreibung error , GE revisions , Errors of GC |
||||||
b. 108
|
composition: Op. 25 No 10, Etude in B minor
..
Lack of the middle note on the 3rd beat of the bar is almost certainly a mistake of GC (→GE1). category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Omissions to cancel alteration , GE revisions , Errors of GC |