![](/build/images/logo_left-en.png)
![](/build/images/pl-button.5cab5de0.png)
![](/build/images/pomoc-button.d3d09842.png)
![](/build/images/pomoc-button-en.5098433b.png)
Issues : GE revisions
b. 8
|
composition: Op. 25 No 11, Etude in A minor
..
The range and placement of the category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |
||||||||||||||
b. 9
|
composition: Op. 25 No 11, Etude in A minor
..
The slur in GC is written very inaccurately – "boldly" – so that in GE1 it embraces also the first and last crotchet of the bar. It certainly does not correspond to Chopin's idea – cf. inaccurate slurs of GC in bar 10, where the editor did not fall into the trap, and bar 12, where he tried to interpret the dragged slur of GC. See also bars 7-8 or 79-80, as well as, e.g., the Scherzo in C category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Inaccuracies in GC |
||||||||||||||
b. 11
|
composition: Op. 25 No 11, Etude in A minor
..
In the 2nd half of the bar, the only accidental in the part of the R.H. in GC, FE and EE1 is a category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Errors in EE , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals , Errors of GC |
||||||||||||||
b. 12
|
composition: Op. 25 No 11, Etude in A minor
..
The slur of GC, reaching above the rest, is certainly inaccurate. The version of GE1 is most probably an attempt to confer it meaning while preserving its length. The change performed in EE3 proves (excessive) trust of the reviser of this edition to the text of GE1. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Inaccuracies in GC |
||||||||||||||
b. 12
|
composition: Op. 25 No 11, Etude in A minor
..
In GC and FE there is no category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals , Errors of GC |