Issues : Inaccuracies in GC
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- Next »
b. 30-31
|
composition: Op. 25 No 10, Etude in B minor
..
The slurs of GC overlap, so that it cannot be excluded that the intention of the person writing them was to connect them. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GC |
|||||||||
b. 95-97
|
composition: Op. 25 No 10, Etude in B minor
..
Among the four source versions of the slurring, only the first two – GC and EE and FE – are probably authentic. The version of GE1 is certainly erroneous – the engraver confused the bars and inserted the division of the slur one bar too late. In turn, the reviser of GE2 (→GE3) probably assumed that the slur of the grace note and the phrasing slur, which merge in GC, create one slur beginning from the grace note. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions , Inaccuracies in GC |
|||||||||
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 |
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- Next »