|
b. 45-46
|
composition: Op. 25 No 11, Etude in A minor
..
The slur of the L.H. begins in GC more or less in the middle of the 1st beat of the bar, so GE1 embraced also the 1st octave with it. This undoubtedly erroneous interpretation was corrected in GE2 (→GE3). Similarly in bar 47. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Inaccuracies in GC |
||||||||
|
b. 45
|
composition: Op. 25 No 11, Etude in A minor
..
The sources give two version of pedalling – one-bar-long in GC (→GE) and EE1 and half-bar-long in FE and EE2 (→EE3). Both versions are certainly authentic and the pedalling of FE can be later – cf. bars 46-48. In the main text we give, however, the first one, as it was written in GC with Chopin's hand and – which could be perhaps meaningful – is present together with the enriched version of the 3rd crochet of the bar. Similarly in bar 47. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Authentic corrections in GC |
||||||||
|
b. 46
|
composition: Op. 25 No 11, Etude in A minor
..
Based on the fact of writing the part of the L.H. under the semiquavers of the R.H., the equal quavers in GC (→GE) are a result of a mistake of the copyist who forgot to add the dot extending b category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors of GC , Dotted or even rhythm |
||||||||
|
b. 46
|
composition: Op. 25 No 11, Etude in A minor
..
It is hard to state how the erroneous version of GE1 occurred, as the e category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 46
|
composition: Op. 25 No 11, Etude in A minor
..
The arpeggio in EE could have been added by Chopin in the base text to this edition. category imprint: Differences between sources |
and semiquaver beam.
