Select: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Pitch
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main


Pitch

b. 89

composition: Op. 25 No 11, Etude in A minor

A1 in #C (→GE) & EE3

B1 in FE & EE2 (→EE3)

..

The version with A1, present in GC (→GE) and EE3, is almost certainly erroneous:

  • while copying 8 groups 4 semiquavers each in bars 89-90, the copyist, instead of the fourth, fifth and sixth group (the lowest notes B1A1E1), rewrote the fifth, sixth and seventh (A1E1A1);
  • the mistake was then noticed, yet only partially – two erroneous notes in bar 90 were corrected, yet A1 in bar 89 was left without correction. It is not certain who performed this correction – certain graphical features of the added A1 note at the beginning of bar 90, as well as the way in which the 5th note of this bar was "remade" are characteristic rather for Gutmann.

In the version of FE and EE1 (→EE2), which we give, the accentuated bass notes create a rhythmically simplified base motif of the Etude in bars 89-90: .

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors of GC , Alterations in GC

b. 95

composition: Op. 25 No 11, Etude in A minor

..

In GC, due to the too early beginning of the octave sign, used to write the final fragment of the part of the passage in the R.H., two notes – f2 and g2 – are written one octave higher than it results from the logic of the musical course. GE1 not only did leave the mistake, but it embraced one note more (e2) with the octave sign. The correct text was introduced only in GE2 (→GE3).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions , Errors of GC