b. 62
|
composition: Op. 25 No 11, Etude in A minor category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Cautionary accidentals |
|||||||||
b. 64
|
composition: Op. 25 No 11, Etude in A minor
..
In this context, Chopin notation, although inaccurate, may mean only the hold of the d1 note. Therefore, in the main text we suggest specifying the notation by extending the semiquaver to the required value of a quaver. This type of notation is also to be encountered in other Chopin's pieces, e.g., in Allegro de Concert, Op. 46, bars 162-163. category imprint: Editorial revisions |
|||||||||
b. 64
|
composition: Op. 25 No 11, Etude in A minor
..
The second of the fingering numerals, present only in FE, may be erroneous – the 1st finger may refer here only to b1, which does not result from the notation. It is likely that the engraver misinterpreted the wedge written in the manuscript, which is present here in the other sources. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE |
|||||||||
b. 64
|
composition: Op. 25 No 11, Etude in A minor
..
Lack of the wedge for the L.H. may correspond to the notation of the base text to FE, however, it cannot be excluded that the engraver confused the wedge for a fingering numeral. In the remaining sources the wedges are present in the parts of both hands (except for GE1, in which the signs were undoubtedly misinterpreted as staccato dots). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions , Wedges |
|||||||||
b. 65
|
composition: Op. 25 No 11, Etude in A minor
..
In GC Chopin moved the indication between the staves – the copyist wrote it under the bottom stave. It is hard to state whether such a placement of the sign was present in the manuscript copied by Gutmann – is between the staves both in FE and EE. category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information issues: Authentic corrections in GC |